RBI compounds BPTP and two directors for ₹4.84 crore under FEMA

RBI orders FEMA compounding for BPTP and two directors

The Reserve Bank of India issued compounding orders on September 17, 2026, against BPTP Ltd and its directors Kabul Chawla and Sudhanshu Tripathi in connection with foreign investments received in 2007 and 2008. The total amount set for compounding is ₹4,84,35,000: ₹4 crore for the company and ₹40.36 lakh each for the two directors.

The matter concerns foreign direct investment from two Mauritius-based entities, together amounting to about ₹537.5 crore. The orders relate to FEMA provisions applicable when the investments were made. Compounding is a statutory process for resolving a contravention by paying a prescribed amount; the orders do not establish a criminal conviction. The case is about the company’s investment arrangements and conduct, rather than a particular BPTP development or location.

Investment terms and the FEMA proceedings

BPTP received approximately US$77.67 million, or about ₹322.5 crore, from CPI India I Ltd on August 21, 2007. On July 9, 2008, it received approximately US$49.83 million, or about ₹215 crore, from Harbour Victoria Investment Holding Ltd. The investments and their associated terms were examined in proceedings under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.

Investigators said the investment agreements contained put-option provisions and assured-return or internal-rate-of-return clauses. They found those terms impermissible under the FEMA rules applicable at the time. The Enforcement Directorate also alleged that about ₹320 crore from the CPI India I Ltd investment was placed in fixed deposits and mutual funds rather than directed to projects as required by the investment terms. These are investigative findings and allegations described in relation to the case.

• The RBI made the orders under Section 15(1) of FEMA.
• Show-cause notices were issued in January 2016.
• BPTP later applied to compound the alleged contraventions under Section 15; the ED subsequently issued a no-objection certificate.
• The ED’s Gurugram zonal office initiated adjudication proceedings and filed a complaint in December 2025.

The reported compounding amount resolves long-running FEMA adjudication proceedings, subject to payment within the prescribed period. The case concerns cross-border investment and regulatory compliance; it is not tied to a named project, development site or locality.

No single project or site is at the centre of the case

The transactions involved company-level foreign investment, not a project identified by name or location. The allegations described in connection with the proceedings relate to investment terms and the handling of funds. They do not identify a specific residential or commercial development as the subject of the RBI orders.

The proceedings therefore should be understood as a corporate regulatory matter. The reports on the order do not offer a named-source assessment of consequences for home buyers, project delivery or local property markets, and the orders themselves do not establish such effects.

BPTP’s development footprint

BPTP Ltd, formerly known as Business Park Town Planners Private Limited, was established in 2005. The company’s stated portfolio spans Gurugram, Faridabad and Noida. It says it has developed more than 50 projects, delivered over 50 million square feet and handed over more than 25,000 units.

Its listed developments include Downtown 66 in Sector 66, Gurugram; GAIA Residences and Amstoria Verti-Greens in Sector 102, Gurugram; and SkyNest Towers in Sector 80, Faridabad. This broader footprint provides context for the company named in the FEMA proceedings, but the RBI orders are not connected in the reported details to any of these projects.

Payment is the next step

BPTP and the two directors are required to pay their respective compounding amounts within the stipulated window. The payment deadline has not been specified in the reported details. Under Section 15(2) of FEMA, pending legal proceedings against the company and directors are to terminate once the prescribed amount is paid.

The next procedural milestone is therefore payment of the ordered sums and the resulting closure of the pending proceedings. No further announced action or dated next step accompanies the orders.