The Congress party launched a strong attack on the Narendra Modi government on June 5, 2026, over the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s interim findings against Rajesh Exports, describing the case as a glaring example of what the party calls the BJP’s crony capitalist approach to governance.
Congress Raises Alarm Over Rs 15 Lakh Crore Revenue Discrepancy
Addressing a press conference in New Delhi, AICC Media and Publicity Department Chairman Pawan Khera stated that SEBI’s interim observations pointed to approximately Rs 15.15 lakh crore in revenues reported by Rajesh Exports between FY21 and FY25 that could not be adequately verified through supporting records. Khera described this as one of the most serious financial misrepresentation cases in India’s corporate history and raised serious questions about investor protection and regulatory oversight.
He argued that if SEBI’s findings are sustained, the case would not merely represent a corporate governance failure but would also reflect poorly on the central government’s entire regulatory framework, which he claimed has repeatedly favoured select corporates over ordinary investors.
SEBI Probe Uncovers Major Revenue Discrepancies
According to Khera, SEBI initiated its investigation following complaints about unusually large receivables that remained unpaid for extended periods. The regulator reportedly found that between 97 and 99 percent of Rajesh Exports’ consolidated revenues during the period under review were attributed to overseas subsidiaries and step-down entities.
A key figure in the probe is Valcambi SA, the Swiss gold refinery acquired by Rajesh Exports and considered the group’s primary operating business. Khera alleged that SEBI identified a significant gap between Valcambi’s own reported revenues of approximately Rs 543 crore and the group’s consolidated figure of nearly Rs 2.9 lakh crore for the same period—raising fundamental questions about the accuracy of the company’s financial disclosures.
Auditors and Investigators Denied Access to Records
Khera further alleged that forensic auditors and SEBI investigators were repeatedly denied access to transaction-level records, ERP systems, customer-wise sales data, supplier records, inventory details, and debtor and creditor information. He added that the company’s defence citing Swiss confidentiality laws was rejected by SEBI, which maintained that such provisions cannot override obligations under Indian securities regulations.
The Congress leader also highlighted SEBI’s concerns about around Rs 1,035 crore reportedly invested in African mining assets; transactions worth Rs 11,488 crore involving Affluence Shares and Stocks Private Limited, where the regulator found inconsistencies; and the alleged routing of company funds through the personal bank accounts of promoter Rajesh Mehta.
Shareholder Wealth of Rs 12,726 Crore Wiped Out
SEBI estimated shareholder wealth erosion of approximately Rs 12,726 crore as a result of the alleged discrepancies. The regulator ordered a fresh forensic audit and imposed interim restrictions on the promoter. Khera pointed out that Rajesh Exports’ stock price collapsed from nearly Rs 900 to around Rs 100, devastating small retail investors while major institutional players had reportedly exited their positions before SEBI’s findings became public.
Congress Draws Parallels With Adani-Hindenburg Row
Khera linked the Rajesh Exports matter to broader concerns about the independence of India’s regulatory institutions, drawing parallels with the Adani-Hindenburg controversy and past questions over the functioning of SEBI under former Chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch. He recalled that the Opposition’s demands for a Joint Parliamentary Committee investigation into corporate-regulatory relationships had been repeatedly rejected by the government.
He also noted that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had previously visited Rajesh Exports facilities in the United States while promoting investment abroad.
Five Questions Posed to the Government
Khera posed five pointed questions to the government, asking how a publicly listed company could report such large revenues over multiple years if the underlying transactions and records were unavailable for verification and what role agencies, including the Financial Intelligence Unit, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, the Enforcement Directorate, and the CBI, played in monitoring the overseas subsidiaries that accounted for the bulk of the company’s reported revenues.
He concluded by calling for full accountability, saying ordinary investors, shareholders, pensioners and citizens deserve regulators that are independent, vigilant and free from political interference — and that the country deserves clear answers.
Source: UNI