RBI Slaps Rs 3.10 Lakh Penalty on IFL Finance Over Gold Loan Auction Violations:

IFL Finance Limited was fined Rs 3.10 lakh by the Reserve Bank of India for violating NBFC regulations and failing to refund excess money from auctioned pledged gold to borrowers.
Company Punished for Failing to Refund Excess Gold Auction Proceeds

RBI Slaps Rs 3.10 Lakh Penalty on IFL Finance Over Gold Loan Auction Violations
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under the Government of India has imposed a monetary penalty amounting to Rs 3.10 lakh on IFL Finance Limited for non-adherence to certain provisions issued by it. These provisions are linked to the ‘Master Direction – Reserve Bank of India (Non-Banking Financial Company - Scale Based Regulation) Directions, 2023’.
The RBI has announced this action in exercise of its powers granted under section 58G(1)(b) read with section 58B(5)(aa) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, through an order dated May 11, 2026.
Previously, the RBI had conducted a legal inspection of the disputed company in accordance with its financial position as of March 31, 2025. The probe concluded that the company had not complied with some of the RBI's instructions. Consequently, a show cause notice (SCN) was issued to the company, asking it to disclose the reason why the proposed consequent action (penalty) should not be taken against it.
Thereafter, the company furnished a detailed reply to the notice, along with oral submissions during the personal hearing. However, the RBI did not find them relevant and noted that the charges made against the company were liable to be sustained. Hence, it confirmed the proposed penalty of Rs 3.10 lakh.
The company did not return the extra money received from auctioning pledged gold items, after deducting the borrowers’ outstanding loan amounts, to some borrowers.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2450My Recent Articles
- ITAT Deletes Rs 12 Lakh Section 68 Addition After Assessee Proves Lender’s Identity, Creditworthiness and Genuine TransactionPremium
- ITAT Holds Approval Should Be Taken from PCCIT under Section 151(ii) When Section 148 Notice Is After 3-Year Time LimitPremium
- ITAT Sets Aside CIT(E)’s Rejection of Charitable Trust’s Section 12AB Registration and 80G Approval ApplicationsPremium
- ITAT Upholds Section 148 Reopening But Restricts Rs 30 Lakh Accommodation Entry Addition To 5%, Cites Double TaxationPremium
- Claiming Full TDS Credit Without Reporting Entire Income Is Underreporting, Not Misreporting: ITAT Premium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








