Axis Bank Q4 Results: Net Profit Marginally Falls To Rs 7,118 Crore, Re 1 Dividend Declared
Last Updated:
Axis Bank Q4 Results: Its net interest income, the difference between interest earned on loans and paid on deposits, rises 5.5 per cent to Rs 13,811 crore.
Axis Bank Q4 Results: Axis Bank on Thursday reported a marginally fall in its standalone net profit to Rs 7,118 crore for the fourth quarter ended March 2025, compared with Rs 7,130 crore a year ago. The private lender's total income during January-March 2025 rose 6 per cent to Rs 38,022 crore, compared with Rs 35,990 crore in the year-ago period.
Axis Bank Q4 Results: Re 1 Dividend Declared
Yes Bank's board of directors has recommended a dividend of Re 1 per equity share for the year ended March 31, 2025. This would be subject to approval by the shareholders at the next annual general meeting.
Its net interest income, the difference between interest earned on loans and paid on deposits, rose 5.5 per cent to Rs 13,811 crore, according to a regulatory filing.
Net interest margin (NIM) for Q4FY25 stood at 3.97 per cent.
Axis Bank Q4 Results: Total Income Rises
Total income rose to Rs 38,022 crore in the March quarter of the 2024-25 fiscal year, from Rs 35,990 crore in the year-ago period, Axis Bank said in a regulatory filing.
The bank's gross non-performing asset (NPA) improved to 1.28 per cent in the quarter under review from to 1.43 per cent in the year-ago period. However, net NPA was at 0.33 per cent in Q4 FY25 from 0.31 per cent in the year-ago period.
For the 2024-25 fiscal year, the bank's net profit rose to Rs 26,373 crore from Rs 24,861 crore in the preceding fiscal year. Besides, the total income grew to Rs 1,47,934 crore in FY25 from Rs 1,31,810 crore in FY24.
'The bank prioritised profitability over growth, considering the uncertain macros and tight liquidity environment dominating most of FY25, while continuing to meaningfully invest in making the franchise more sustainable. As we enter FY26, we believe the operating environment is improving, which should help us drive both growth and profitability," Axis Bank MD and CEO Amitabh Chaudhry said.
Axis Bank Q4 Results: Balance Sheet Grows 9%
Axis Bank said its balance sheet grew 9 per cent year-on-year and stood at Rs 16,09,930 crore as on March 31, 2025.
Shares of Axis Bank on Thursday closed at Rs 1,208.5 apiece on the NSE, 0.13 per cent higher.
First Published:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Licences of 24 fertilizer dealers suspended after raids in Gujarat
Gandhinagar: The state agriculture department conducted surprise raids at dealerships selling chemical fertilizers on Saturday to prevent misuse. In the state-wide raids conducted across 16 districts, the licences of 24 dealers were suspended, the govt said on Sunday. The govt stated that the inspections were carried out to ensure that sufficient fertilizer stocks are available to farmers for the kharif season. An official statement mentioned that the inspections were conducted by 32 teams of the agriculture department on Saturday in 16 districts. The inspections involved checking the physical stock of fertilisers, the stock in POS machines and verifying records of govt-approved dealers of chemical fertilizers. "In total, 57 dealers across 16 districts were inspected, and show-cause notices were issued to dealers for various reasons. The licences of 24 dealers were suspended due to irregularities found in the fertilizer stocks at 24 locations," the statement said. An estimated 1,090.64 metric tonnes of fertilizers worth 1.78 crore were prevented from being sold, and further legal action was taken. During the inspection, sale of fertilizer stocks was verified with 101 farmers," the statement added. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo In the first raid conducted by the agriculture department, discrepancies were found at 17 locations, and an estimated stock of 718.47 metric tonnes worth approximately 1.14 crore was prevented from being sold. The statement added that a total of 31 show-cause notices were issued for various reasons, and the licences of 17 dealers were suspended. In the second round of inspection, another 31 dealers were also subjected to raids. A total of 372.17 metric tonnes of unauthorized stock worth Rs 63.65 lakh was prevented from being sold. Show-cause notices were issued to the dealers for various reasons, and the licences of seven dealers were suspended.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tata-govt body bank guarantee case: HC refuses to intervene
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed by Tata Projects Limited, which sought restoration of status quo, directing the company to seek remedy before the commercial court. The petition concerned the encashment of a performance bank guarantee of Rs 167.46 crore by the Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society (CHiPS), the nodal agency for driving IT growth and implementing IT and e-Governance initiatives in the state. A division bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad heard the petition filed by Tata Projects. The company sought restoration of the status quo ante, asking for the return of the Rs 167.46 crore to State Bank of India and the issuance of an identical bank guarantee. Alternatively, Tata Projects requested CHiPS to deposit the amount in an interest-bearing account until the dispute's resolution. According to court records, CHiPS had issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the selection of a Master System Integrator (MSI) for the BharatNet Phase-II Project in Chhattisgarh. A dispute arose between Tata Projects and CHiPS during the commercial contract. Previously, Tata Projects had filed writ petition, in which a single bench of the high court on 2 July 2024, granted interim protection, restraining respondents from encashing the performance bank guarantee. This writ petition was later disposed of on 30 April 2025, with the court re-delegating the parties to approach the commercial court. Subsequently, Tata Projects filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The commercial court, on 3 May 2025, ordered an interim status quo regarding the invocation of the bank guarantee. However, after the respondents filed their reply, the commercial court disposed of the application on 6 May 2025, vacating the status quo order. The initiation of the bank guarantee encashment process led Tata Projects to approach the high court. Senior counsel Kishore Bhaduri, appearing for Tata Projects, argued that CHiPS's conduct was fraudulent and high-handed, misleading the court and misusing its power by attempting to invoke the bank guarantee. Counsel for the respondents and the state argued that the writ petition was not maintainable, as Tata Projects had remedies available under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or under the Chhattisgarh Madhyashtham Adhikaran Act, 1983. The high court observed that an arbitration clause existed in the agreement and that Tata Projects had already approached the commercial court. The court ruled that the writ petition was not maintainable at this juncture. However, it granted Tata Projects the liberty to pursue statutory remedies before the commercial court. The court also clarified that the respondents were free to raise objections regarding the maintainability of any application. The High Court directed the commercial court to consider and decide any interim application or application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, filed by the petitioner expeditiously and in accordance with the law. The high court also made it clear that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving it to the commercial court to decide independently.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Insurance firm directed to pay 11L for unfair trade practice in settling claim
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh state consumer disputes redressal commission directed an insurance firm backed by a public-sector bank to pay Rs 11,16,801 to a Raipur-based firm for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in settling a vehicle insurance claim. The commission also awarded Rs 50,000 for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. The order, passed by President Justice Gautam Chourdiya and Member Pramod Kumar Varma, set aside an earlier ruling by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur, which dismissed the complaint as premature. The commission noted that keeping the claim pending for an extended period, especially after the damaged vehicle was handed over as per the insurer's instructions, amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. "After accepting the surveyor's assessment, instructing disposal of the damaged vehicle, and its actual disposal, it was improper for the insurer to raise further objections. Keeping the claim pending despite receiving the wreck value amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The insurer is liable to pay the remaining Rs 11,16,801, along with compensation for mental agony and litigation costs. The district commission erred in holding the claim premature, making its order unsustainable and liable to be set aside," remarked the consumer commission on the case. The firm's car, insured with the insurance firm, met with an accident on Nov 8, 2019. The insurance company assessed the loss at Rs 11,16,801 and instructed the complainant to hand over the damaged vehicle to a salvage buyer, who paid Rs 13,30,000. The firm alleged that despite these actions and assurances of payment, the remaining amount of Rs 11,16,801 was not disbursed. A complaint was filed before the district commission seeking the balance amount and compensation. The insurance firm, in its defence, said that the claim was pending as the complainant did not provide clarifications and relevant documents regarding the incident. The state commission, however, observed that the insurer already acted upon the surveyor's settlement recommendation and instructed the disposal of the vehicle's wreckage. The commission noted that after proceeding towards settlement and the disposal of the wreckage, it was improper for the insurer to raise further objections. The insurance company has been directed to pay the remaining assessed loss of Rs 11,16,801 with 6% annual simple interest from the date of filing the complaint until realisation, along with the compensation and litigation costs.
