What Happened on June 30, 2026

On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) removed four Indian companies from the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) under the RUSSIA-EO14024 program. This Indian companies delisting covered RRG Engineering Technologies Private Limited and Lokesh Machines Limited (both based in Hyderabad), Galaxy Bearings Ltd (Ahmedabad), and Shaurya Aeronautics Private Limited (Delhi).

Who the Four Companies Are and Why They Were Sanctioned

All four companies were designated in October 2024 as part of a broader package covering 21 Indian parties (19 companies and two individuals) under Executive Order 14024, for providing material, technological, or other support to the government of the Russian Federation.

RRG Engineering Technologies has ties to India’s aviation sector; according to Treasury, the company made more than 100 shipments of microelectronics to a designated Russian entity. Its chairman and managing director, G.M. Ganga Rao, previously served on a Ministry of Civil Aviation task force on unmanned aerial vehicle technology.

Lokesh Machines, a publicly listed company supplying machine tools and industrial equipment, counts Volvo, Honda, Suzuki, John Deere, and Cummins among its clients. It was designated for supplying machine tools that OFAC treated as support to Russia’s manufacturing sector.

Galaxy Bearings, also publicly listed, specializes in roller bearings and was accused of exporting high-priority dual-use goods to Russian counterparties.

Shaurya Aeronautics was designated over alleged supplies of radar navigational equipment to Russian entities.

Why the Delisting Is Partial: What It Means to Remove Four of Twenty-One

Unlike the delisting of the Turkish network the day before, where OFAC removed an entire identified group of affiliated parties at once, this Indian companies delisting is partial: only four of the 21 parties designated in October 2024 were removed. The remaining 17, including both individuals, remain on the list as of publication. This suggests the underlying finding of support to Russia was not revisited for the group as a whole; rather, the delisting appears to reflect an individualized assessment of each of the four companies’ circumstances, not a wholesale review of the 2024 package.

The Diplomatic Backdrop: India’s Ministry of External Affairs

OFAC’s official notice does not disclose the specific basis for each company’s removal. India’s Ministry of External Affairs, however, has consistently maintained since the original designations that India is a “responsible member of the international community,” participates in key multilateral export-control regimes, and regularly conducts outreach to ensure Indian businesses comply with export restrictions.

According to Indian officials, the matter was raised directly with the U.S. administration. This sets the Indian companies delisting apart from the Turkish precedent, where removal appeared to follow from the companies’ own administrative efforts, likely through delisting petitions, whereas here a government-to-government dimension is clearly visible.

Notably, the delisting also coincided with a broader thaw in U.S.-India trade relations: earlier in 2026, the additional 25% tariff imposed in 2025 on Indian imports (introduced in response to India’s purchases of Russian oil) was lifted. This may point to a wider trend of easing trade and sanctions-related pressure on India during the current period.

Market Reaction and Practical Implications for Counterparties

Because Galaxy Bearings and Lokesh Machines are publicly traded, the delisting had an immediate effect on their share prices: Galaxy Bearings rose roughly 20%, and Lokesh Machines roughly 5%. Lokesh Machines formally notified its stock exchange that OFAC had removed the company from the SDN List effective June 30, 2026, and that all previously blocked property and interests had been unblocked.

For foreign counterparties, the delisting means transactions with these four companies are no longer prohibited because of their former SDN status, and the secondary sanctions risk no longer applies. Banks and partners that had restricted or ended dealings with these companies because of their sanctioned status may now reassess those relationships, subject, of course, to their own compliance policies and to the fact that 17 other parties from the original 2024 package remain sanctioned.

Comparison with the Turkish Case

The Indian companies delisting and the Turkish network delisting, occurring on consecutive days (June 29 and 30, 2026), represent two different patterns of OFAC sanctions relief. The Turkish case was a group delisting, technically uniform, covering an entire identified network of affiliated parties, likely following an administrative reconsideration process along the lines of the “sanctions modernization”. The Indian case is a targeted delisting of four out of twenty-one designated parties, with a visible diplomatic dimension and a measurable stock-market reaction. Both cases support a point we’ve made before: delisting in 2026 is not only possible but actively used by OFAC, whether the underlying mechanism is a technical administrative procedure or the product of government-to-government engagement.

Practical Takeaways

For similarly situated clients (third-country companies designated on the SDN List for allegedly supporting Russia’s defense-industrial base), this case illustrates two parallel, non-exclusive paths to delisting. The first is administrative: a delisting petition under 31 C.F.R. § 501.807 and, if necessary, litigation against OFAC. The second is diplomatic: engaging the official channels of the company’s home government, particularly relevant for companies operating in jurisdictions with substantial trade ties to the United States. In practice, the two paths can complement each other: even where diplomatic support is available, the substantive showing (evidence that the conduct at issue has ceased, or that there was no adequate basis for the original designation) remains the same as in any other delisting petition, and requires the same careful legal preparation.