Rajesh Exports under SEBI ban over ₹15.15 tn revenue

What SEBI’s interim order alleges

Rajesh Exports Ltd (REL), a Bengaluru-based gold jewellery and refining company, is facing a major regulatory challenge after the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued an interim ex parte order against the company and its promoter-chairman and CEO Rajesh Mehta. SEBI alleged large-scale misrepresentation in the company’s consolidated financial statements and said a substantial part of the reported overseas revenue could not be verified with supporting documents and records. The regulator’s interim findings centre on reported consolidated revenues attributed to overseas subsidiaries over five financial years. SEBI alleged a cumulative discrepancy of ₹15.15 trillion in consolidated revenue between FY2020-21 and FY2024-25. The order described this as a prima facie case of misrepresentation and also raised concerns around fund diversion. SEBI also referred the matter to the National Financial Reporting Authority (NFRA) for examination of the company’s auditors and ordered a fresh forensic audit.

The scale of the reported revenue mismatch

SEBI’s interim order said Rajesh Exports reported around ₹15.45 trillion of consolidated revenue between FY21 and FY25, of which about ₹15.18 trillion was attributed to subsidiaries and step-down subsidiaries. The regulator alleged that approximately ₹15.15 trillion of that revenue was prima facie misrepresented. In separate descriptions of the same findings, the interim report also said 97% to 99% of the company’s reported consolidated revenue over multiple years could not currently be verified. The company’s exchange clarification cited the regulator’s claim that the questioned revenue accounted for nearly 99.8% of total reported consolidated revenue over the period.

For investors, the critical issue is not only the magnitude of the revenue but the basis on which those figures were presented in consolidated statements. SEBI said the company attributed massive revenues to overseas subsidiaries even when audited standalone financial statements of those subsidiaries showed only a fraction of the amounts. The regulator also alleged that unaudited figures were used in financial statements, which would have the effect of significantly increasing reported revenue.

How the overseas subsidiary structure features in the case

Rajesh Exports has repeatedly pointed to its international operations, especially its Swiss gold refining business, as the main driver of group revenue. In its stock exchange filing rejecting the allegations, the company said the bulk of its consolidated revenues came from Valcambi SA, which it described as the world’s largest gold refinery, engaged in refining and sale of gold bullion to major banks, central banks, and large bullion entities globally.

SEBI’s interim order lays out the group structure as follows. At the top is Rajesh Exports Ltd in India. Below it is REL Singapore, described as a wholly owned subsidiary that the company presented as a holding company without significant day-to-day operations. REL Singapore owns Switzerland-based Global Gold Refineries AG (GGR), which Rajesh Exports also described as a holding company. GGR in turn owns Valcambi SA, the Swiss refinery described by the company as the principal operating entity. SEBI alleged that large reported revenues were attributed to overseas entities within this chain, but a substantial portion could not be verified.

Specific allegations cited in the interim report

Beyond revenue recognition and verification issues, the interim report cited multiple alleged red flags. These included claims of personal gold trades being covered up as corporate sales, and alleged phoney investments in gold mines amounting to ₹1,035 crore. The regulator’s order also referenced concerns around opaque transactions and investments linked to “gold mines in Africa”. SEBI further alleged non-cooperation with attempts to verify overseas operations.

Taken together, these allegations go beyond an accounting dispute and move into potential issues of disclosure, internal controls, and the traceability of overseas business activity. SEBI’s interim view, as described in the order, is that the presentation of consolidated financials may have created a picture of a much larger operating business than what could be supported by available records.

SEBI’s market access restrictions on Rajesh Mehta

SEBI has restrained Rajesh Mehta from buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in Rajesh Exports securities until further orders. The interim order also barred access to the securities market, reflecting the regulator’s concern about continuing risk while the matter is examined. The action is interim in nature, meaning it is not a final adjudication on the allegations, but it carries immediate implications for governance, disclosure scrutiny, and market confidence.

The regulator’s decision to order a fresh forensic audit and refer the case to NFRA signals that the next phase will likely focus on detailed record examination, subsidiary-level information, and the audit trail supporting consolidated reporting.

Company’s response: “revenues are correct”

Rajesh Exports has denied any financial irregularities and said its revenues were accurate and genuine. The company described the SEBI order as interim and said it contained no conclusive adverse findings. In a stock exchange filing made after the interim order, Rajesh Exports said it was debt-free and stated it had never raised money from public offerings beyond its initial public issue of ₹10 crore in 1995, and had never made equity placements to domestic institutions.

On the central point of revenue, the company stated: “The consolidated Revenue as stated by the Company is correct.” Rajesh Mehta also rejected the findings publicly, saying there was “nothing true” in the interim order and suggesting a “communication gap”.

How the case surfaced and key dates

The sequence described in the provided material starts with a shareholder complaint and ends with an interim order. On March 11, 2024, SEBI received an email complaint against Rajesh Exports from a shareholder. More than two years later, the regulator issued its interim findings.

June 3, 2026 is the key date cited for SEBI’s 109-page interim ex parte order against the company and Rajesh Mehta. Rajesh Exports subsequently filed clarifications with the exchanges rejecting the allegations and reiterating that its reported revenues were genuine.

Market and stakeholder exposure highlighted in reports

The interim order has put Rajesh Exports into what has been described as a two-front crisis, combining regulatory scrutiny with lender action. Separately, Canara Bank has initiated debt recovery proceedings against the company, according to the provided text. The material also highlights shareholder exposure, noting that Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) holds a 10.8% stake in Rajesh Exports.

These developments matter because they affect how investors interpret risk around financial statements, the continuity of operations in overseas subsidiaries, and the company’s funding and banking relationships. The SEBI order’s focus on verifiability of revenue and subsidiary disclosures also raises broader questions about how cross-border structures are presented in consolidated reporting.

Key figures and claims at a glance

Timeline of the regulatory action

Why the interim findings matter

The allegations focus on consolidated revenue recognition tied to overseas subsidiaries and whether reported business activity is supported by verifiable records. The case also underscores how reliance on unaudited subsidiary figures, if established, can materially alter the portrayal of scale in consolidated statements. SEBI’s referral to NFRA and the order for a forensic audit indicate that scrutiny is likely to extend to audit processes, subsidiary reporting, and disclosure controls across the group.

For Rajesh Exports, the immediate issue is regulatory restriction and reputational risk, while the longer-term issue will depend on findings from forensic and audit reviews. The company’s position remains that it has not overstated revenues and that the interim order is not conclusive.

Conclusion

SEBI’s interim order against Rajesh Exports and Rajesh Mehta alleges a prima facie misrepresentation of ₹15.15 trillion of consolidated revenue between FY21 and FY25, largely tied to overseas subsidiaries. Rajesh Exports has rejected the allegations and reiterated that its consolidated revenues are correct, calling the order interim. The next milestones are the forensic audit process and NFRA’s examination of the auditors, which will shape the regulator’s final view and any further action.