Rajesh Exports to fully cooperate with forensic audit, says no plan to challenge SEBI interim order

Bengaluru-based gold jewellery and refining company Rajesh Exports Ltd has said it will fully cooperate with the fresh forensic audit ordered by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and will not challenge the regulator’s interim order.

The company’s founder and chairman Rajesh Mehta stated in an interview that Rajesh Exports has been transparent with investigators and has already submitted all documents sought so far.

The clarification comes after SEBI raised serious concerns over alleged inflation of consolidated revenues by ₹15.15 lakh crore over a five-year period from 2020–21 to 2024–25. The regulator has flagged that a significant portion of the company’s reported revenue was attributed to overseas subsidiaries, particularly Switzerland-based Valcambi SA.

SEBI noted in its interim order that the subsidiary’s audited standalone financial statements did not reflect the massive revenue figures reported at the consolidated level, raising questions about possible misrepresentation of financial disclosures.

According to Mehta, any gaps in documentation are due to the large volume of data handled by the company rather than intentional withholding. He said the company is currently working to submit all remaining documents within the next five to six days.

He also rejected allegations that forensic auditors were denied access to systems or records, stating that auditors were provided dedicated workspace and full access to requested materials for over two months.

“If they needed more information, we would have provided it,” Mehta said, adding that the company has consistently cooperated with the investigation.

SEBI, in its June 3 interim order, directed the company to cooperate fully with investigators, submit relevant documents within 30 days, and ensure accurate disclosure of financial statements and related-party transactions.

Mehta said that only a small number of issues remain unresolved out of several queries raised over the past two and a half years, and expressed confidence that the final outcome would be favourable once all clarifications are submitted.

On legal action, he said the company sees no reason to challenge the interim order, noting that it does not impose penalties or trading restrictions on the company itself.

However, he added that if any adverse final order is issued despite full compliance, the company may consider legal recourse.