India corporate profits hit 17-year high in FY25; profit-to-GDP ratio rises to 4.7%: Motilal Oswal report shows
NEW DELHI: Indian corporate profits hit a remarkable 17-year high in FY25, with Nifty-500 companies achieving a profit-to-GDP ratio of 4.7%, according to a report by Motilal Oswal.
"In 2025, the corporate profit-to-GDP ratio for the Nifty-500 Universe remained at 4.7%, marking a 17-year high," the report said. For all listed companies, the ratio stood even higher at 5.1%, the highest level seen in 14 years, it added.
The sustained increase in profit-to-GDP ratio received support from various sectors' strong performance. Notably, Telecom shifted from a seven-year negative contribution to positive territory in FY25.
Additional positive contributions came from PSU Banks (0.07%), Healthcare (0.04%), Consumer (0.04%), Metals (0.03%), and Infrastructure (0.2%).
Conversely, several sectors experienced decreases in their profit-to-GDP ratio share. Oil & Gas showed the largest reduction at 0.28%, followed by Automobiles (0.03%), Cement (0.02%), Utilities (0.02%), Private Banks (0.01%), and Retail (0.01%).
Nifty-500 companies demonstrated resilience with 10.5% year-on-year profit growth in FY25, building upon FY24's 30.5% increase and achieving a five-year CAGR of 30.3%.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
"The corporate profits for the Nifty-500 universe experienced double-digit growth, rising 10.5% YoY in FY25," the report added.
These results were achieved despite weak consumption, reduced government expenditure during election-related first half, and export volatility amidst global uncertainty.
The overall listed companies' profit-to-GDP ratio increased marginally from 5.0% in FY24 to 5.1% in FY25. Including both listed and unlisted firms, the ratio had increased to 7.3% in FY24 from 6.3% in FY23.
Ownership analysis revealed private companies within Nifty-500 reached a record profit-to-GDP ratio of 2.8% in FY25, up from 2.4% in FY24.
Private companies in the Nifty-500 hit a record profit-to-GDP ratio of 2.8% in FY25, up from 2.6% in FY24, according to a Motilal Oswal report.
Public sector units (PSUs) saw a slight dip to 1.6% from 1.8%, while multinational companies (MNCs) posted their highest-ever ratio of 0.31% in FY25, up from 0.29% last year.
Stay informed with the latest
business
news, updates on
bank holidays
and
public holidays
.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
32 minutes ago
- Economic Times
NRI wins capital gains tax case in Delhi high court regarding sale of Rs 2 crore property despite Rs 46 lakh tax demand notice
ET Online (Representative image) Delhi High Court: NRI wins Rs 2 crore property sale capital gains tax case despite buyer filing wrong TDS form An non-resident Indian (NRI) residing in the United States of America had to go through a very challenging time when he sold a property in Pune for Rs 2 crore and followed the laid down procedure. The problem started when the buyer deducted 20% TDS on this property transaction and deposited it with the income tax department using a wrong TDS form. As a result of this, the TDS amount simply failed to show up in the NRI's AIS. Without the TDS amount showing up in the AIS, the NRI could not claim it while filing Income Tax Return (ITR), resulting in a financial loss of Rs 18.68 lakh (20% TDS). Moreover, the income tax department, unaware about this problem, issued a tax demand notice of Rs 46 lakh to this NRI as they deemed he sold the property and did not pay capital gains tax on it. The property buyer, however, claimed that he deposited the 20% TDS money with the income tax department and also showed a bank challan receipt for the same. To give you a background context of this problem the property buyer deposited the 20% TDS in Form 26QB which relates to Indian residents. Since the property seller was NRI, the property buyer should have used Form 27Q to deposit the deducted 20% TDS. This wrong selection of the form by the property buyer was the source of all problems for the NRI. As soon as this issue was identified the property buyer went to the bank to correct the TDS form. However, the bank was working on this issue and taking its time to process the correction request. But the matter did not end here. The Income tax department said they cannot fix this issue by themselves as they need to follow the rules and procedure which involves the property buyer giving consent, an indemnity bond and other documents. There were dual challenges for this NRI - on one hand he was facing a tax demand of Rs 46 lakh and on the other hand he could not claim the TDS credit of Rs 18 lakh (20% TDS) as this was not showing up in his AIS. Hence the NRI approached the legal authority and ultimately Delhi High Court for Delhi High Court on May 27, 2025 ordered the income tax department to make the full 20% TDS credit reflect under the NRI's PAN with effect from the date it was deposited by the property buyer. The court also directed the income tax department to compute the amount of the tax refund that may be due to the NRI in accordance with below to understand the facts of this case and why the Delhi High Court ordered the income tax department to fix this issue and compute the tax refund amount that may be due to this NRI. How did this case start? According to the order of the Delhi High Court dated May 27, 2025, here is a timeline of events: 1998: A NRI person residing in the United States of America (USA) purchased a property in Pune. A NRI person residing in the United States of America (USA) purchased a property in Pune. March 18, 2015: A doctor expressed his interest in buying this Pune property from this NRI for a total sale consideration of Rs 2 crore. The NRI accepted the offer. A doctor expressed his interest in buying this Pune property from this NRI for a total sale consideration of Rs 2 crore. The NRI accepted the offer. September5, 2015 : The property buyer informed the NRI that he needs to deduct 20% TDS on this Rs 2 crore property sale. So the buyer will deduct Rs 18.68 lakh (18,68,177) and give the NRI Rs1.8 crore (1,81,31,823). The NRI agreed to this. : The property buyer informed the NRI that he needs to deduct 20% TDS on this Rs 2 crore property sale. So the buyer will deduct Rs 18.68 lakh (18,68,177) and give the NRI Rs1.8 crore (1,81,31,823). The NRI agreed to this. October 27, 2015: The NRI computed his income tax liability as Rs 1.9 lakh (1,91,780) and deposited the same as advance tax. He then repatriated the balance amount of property sale proceeds to the USA. He did not file an income tax return (ITR) for that year. The NRI computed his income tax liability as Rs 1.9 lakh (1,91,780) and deposited the same as advance tax. He then repatriated the balance amount of property sale proceeds to the USA. He did not file an income tax return (ITR) for that year. March 4, 2023: An Income tax officer issued a notice under Section 148(b) to this NRI on the basis of the information available that the NRI had sold a property, which according to the officer, suggested that the petitioner's income had escaped assessment. An Income tax officer issued a notice under Section 148(b) to this NRI on the basis of the information available that the NRI had sold a property, which according to the officer, suggested that the petitioner's income had escaped assessment. April 15, 2023: The NRI person furnished all details and even showed his advance tax receipt, but the tax officer did not accept the same. This officer then proceeded to pass an order under Section 148A(d) holding that it is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148. The NRI person furnished all details and even showed his advance tax receipt, but the tax officer did not accept the same. This officer then proceeded to pass an order under Section 148A(d) holding that it is a fit case for issuance of notice under Section 148. October 30, 2024: The income tax officer issued another notice under Section 142 seeking furnishing of certain documents. The NRI person responded to the same and gave the details. The income tax officer issued another notice under Section 142 seeking furnishing of certain documents. The NRI person responded to the same and gave the details. March 4, 2025: The income tax officer issued a proposed assessment order by accepting the ITR filed by the NRI in response to the earlier notice. The tax officer also issued a computation sheet reflecting a tax demand of Rs 46 lakh (46, 81, 013). He issued another notice showing this tax demand amount. The tax officer based on this notice also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A. The income tax officer issued a proposed assessment order by accepting the ITR filed by the NRI in response to the earlier notice. The tax officer also issued a computation sheet reflecting a tax demand of Rs 46 lakh (46, 81, 013). He issued another notice showing this tax demand amount. The tax officer based on this notice also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 270A. March 2025: The NRI filed a detailed reply pointing out that the entire tax liability had been discharged, but the credit of the same was not effected on account of TDS returns filed under Form 26QB instead of Form 27Q. The NRI directly filed an appeal against this order in the Delhi High Court. What did the Income Tax Department say in the Delhi High Court? Lawyers representing the Income Tax Department said in the Delhi High Court:'The counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the Income Tax Department has been unable to correct the error, as under the Standard Operating Procedure [SOP], the consent of the buyers is required, along with an indemnity bond and other documents,' the reply given to the high court. Delhi High Court asks the tax department why buyers' consent is required for correcting TDS form? When the Delhi High Court asked the tax department why they need buyers' consent for correcting the TDS return form. The lawyers representing the income tax department said:The reply: 'On a pointed query, as to why the buyers' consent would be required, the counsel for the Revenue submits that the same would be necessary in order to obviate any action on the part of the buyers to recover the amount of the TDS that had been deposited. She states that although, there is no dispute as to the deposit of the TDS, but the petitioner's (NRI) case has been withheld only on account of the documents required from the buyers.' Delhi High Court final judgement The Delhi High Court ordered the income tax department to give the full TDS credit of Rs 18 lakh to this NRI and also compute the tax refund amount due to judgement: 'In the peculiar facts of this case, we consider it apposite to direct the Revenue to correct the record and reflect the TDS deposited by the buyers to the petitioner's credit under the return filed in the Form 26QB with effect from the date, the amount was deposited. The Revenue shall further compute the amount of the refund, if any, that may be due to the petitioner in accordance with law. All the orders and communication not in conformity with the aforesaid directions shall be treated as having been set aside. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. The pending application is also disposed of.' To reiterate, the NRI computed the balance of income tax liability at Rs 1.9 lakh (1,91,780) for this Rs 2 crore property sale and deposited the same as advance tax. His AIS was showing this advance tax Income tax department did not dispute this aspect. What is the significance of this case for NRIs? ET Wealth Online has asked various experts about the significance of this case, here's what they said: Gopal Bohra, partner, N.A. Shah LLP, says: 'In this case, the buyer has appropriately deducted the tax at source @20% while making payment to the non-resident seller under section 195, however, wrongly deposited the TDS amount by filling Form 26QB which is applicable where tax is deducted @1% on purchase of property from resident seller. Due to this procedural error committed by the buyer, the non-resident seller's 26AS reflects TDS only @ 1% and balance TDS amount remains unconsumed under PAN of the buyer. Since, there was no loss to the revenue as the buyer has deposited the entire TDS with the government, the High Court has correctly directed the tax department to give credit of the balance TDS amount to the non-resident seller.' Rahul Jain, Partner at Khaitan & Co, says: 'For NRIs selling property in India, this ruling underscores the importance of proactive tax compliance. It is vital to inform the buyer of their non-resident status, ensure that tax is deducted and deposited timely with the government, and that TDS is reported in Form 27Q with correct details (including the TDS amount and PAN of the buyer). If feasible, NRIs may ask the buyers to share the draft form prior to filing for confirmation. NRIs should also ensure to collect Form 16A (TDS certificate), monitor Form 26AS, and file the return in India to claim credit or refund, within statutory timelines. Small lapses can lead to significant complications, so early diligence can help avoid long and costly disputes.' Jain adds: "Income tax law explicitly states that taxes deducted at source and paid to the Central Government by the payor shall be treated as the taxes paid by the recipient. Accordingly, the recipient is legally entitled to claim credit of such taxes deducted and paid. In this instance, the fact that taxes were deducted and paid in India by the buyer (on behalf of the recipient) was undisputed and the issue was strictly limited to procedural lapse on part of the buyer in filing the correct tax form. While the tax department claimed that certain documents and an indemnity bond is required from the buyer as per the internal Standard Operating Procedure to rectify the issue, the High Court exercised its powers of writ and issued the directions to grant the credit." Madhura Samant, Managing Partner, Elarra Law Offices, says: "The Court rightly held there was no statutory power for such a reversal and found the demand and penalty notices to be arbitrary and lacking in reasoned consideration. A buyer's procedural error cannot be allowed to prejudice a compliant seller. This case underscores the importance of balancing procedural compliance with a fair and fact-based evaluation of taxpayer conduct." Samant adds: 'NRIs selling property in India must ensure that the buyer deducts TDS using Form 27Q—not Form 26QB. It is also critical that the buyer has a valid TAN (Tax Deduction Account Number) before deducting TDS, as PAN alone is not sufficient in transactions involving NRIs. Without a TAN, Form 27Q cannot be filed. Additionally, the NRI seller must obtain Form 16A (the TDS Certificate) from the buyer as proof of tax deduction and deposit. Compliance should be double-checked before execution. Even a minor procedural lapse can escalate into significant tax disputes. Proactive oversight and proper documentation are essential to secure rightful tax credit and avoid unnecessary litigation. Legal safeguards start with paperwork. An incorrect form can lead to years of litigation and blocked refunds.' Deepesh Chheda, Partner, Dhruva Advisors: The Delhi High Court prioritized the substance of tax payment over procedural error. Despite the buyers incorrectly filing TDS form, the court recognized that the entire tax liability had been discharged and directed the Revenue to credit the full TDS amount to the NRI, emphasizing that a mere technical lapse should not obstruct rightful credit. This High Court ruling serves as a crucial precedent for NRIs, affirming that substantive tax payment prevails over procedural errors in TDS filings. To prevent similar issues, NRIs must proactively educate their buyers on the correct TDS compliance for non-residents, emphasizing the mandatory use of correct form, and vigilantly verify proper filing to ensure timely credit and avoid protracted dispute.
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Google, Scale AI's largest customer, plans split after Meta deal
Alphabet's Google, the largest customer of Scale AI, plans to cut ties with Scale afternews broke that rival Meta is taking a 49% stake in the AI data-labeling startup, five sources familiar with the matter told Reuters. Google had planned to pay Scale AI about $200 million this year for the human-labeled training data that is crucial for developing technology, including the sophisticated AI models that power Gemini, its ChatGPT competitor, one of the sources said. The search giant already held conversations with several of Scale AI's rivals this week as it seeks to shift away much of that workload, sources added. Scale's loss of significant business comes as Meta takes a big stake in the company, valuing it at $29 billion. Scale was worth $14 billion before the deal. Scale AI intends to keep its business running while its CEO, Alexandr Wang, along with a few employees, move over to Meta. Since its core business is concentrated around a few customers, it could suffer greatly if it loses key customers like Google. In a statement, a Scale AI spokesperson said its business, which spans work with major companies and governments, remains strong, as it is committed to protecting customer data. The company declined to comment on specifics with Google. Scale AI raked in $870 million in revenue in 2024, and Google spent some $150 million on Scale AI's services last year, sources said. Other major tech companies that are customers of Scale's, including Microsoft, are also backing away. Elon Musk's xAI is also looking to exit, one of the sources said. OpenAI decided to pull back from Scale several months ago, according to sources familiar with the matter, though it spends far less money than Google. OpenAI's CFO that the company will continue to work with Scale AI, as one of its many data vendors. Companies that compete with Meta in developing cutting-edge AI models are concerned that doing business with Scale could expose their research priorities and road map to a rival, five sources said. By contracting with Scale AI, customers often share proprietary data as well as prototype products for which Scale's workers are providing data-labeling services. With Meta now taking a 49% stake, AI companies are concerned that one of their chief rivals could gain knowledge about their business strategy and technical blueprints. Google, Microsoft and OpenAI declined to comment. xAI did not respond to a request for comment. The bulk of Scale AI's revenue comes from charging generative AI model makers for providing access to a network of human trainers with specialized knowledge – from historians to scientists, some with doctorate degrees. The humans annotate complex datasets that are used to 'post-train' AI models, and as AI models have become smarter, the demand for the sophisticated human-provided examples has surged, and one annotation could cost as much as $100. Scale also does data-labeling for enterprises like self-driving car companies and the U.S. government, which are likely to stay, according to the sources. But its biggest money-maker is in partnering with generative AI model makers, the sources said. Google had already sought to diversify its data service providers for more than a year, three of the sources said. But Meta's moves this week have led Google to seek to move off Scale AI on all its key contracts, the sources added. Because of the way data-labeling contracts are structured, that process could happen quickly, two sources said. This will provide an opening for Scale AI's rivals to jump in. 'The Meta-Scale deal marks a turning point,' said Jonathan Siddharth, CEO of Turing, a Scale AI competitor. 'Leading AI labs are realizing neutrality is no longer optional, it's essential.' Labelbox, another competitor, will 'probably generate hundreds of millions of new revenue' by the end of the year from customers fleeing Scale, its CEO, Manu Sharma, told Reuters. Handshake, a competitor focusing on building a network of PhDs and experts, saw a surge of workload from top AI labs that compete with Meta. 'Our demand has tripled overnight after the news,' said Garrett Lord, CEO at Handshake. Many AI labs now want to hire in-house data-labelers, which allows their data to remain secure, said Brendan Foody, CEO of Mercor, a startup that in addition to competing directly with Scale AI also builds technology around being able to recruit and vet candidates in an automated way, enabling AI labs to scale up their data labeling operations quickly. Founded in 2016, Scale AI provides vast amounts of labeled data or curated training data, which is crucial for developing sophisticated tools such as OpenAI's ChatGPT. The Meta deal will be a boon for Scale AI's investors including Accel and Index Ventures, as well as its current and former employees. As part of the deal, Scale AI's CEO, Wang, will take a top position leading Meta's AI efforts. Meta is fighting the perception that it may have fallen behind in the AI race after its initial set of Llama 4 large language models released in April fell short of performance expectations.
Hindustan Times
35 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
GNDU to establish Chair in Sikh studies: VC
Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) is strengthening its global footprint with a series of academic collaborations and initiatives aimed at promoting research on Guru Nanak's teachings and advancing higher education. Vice-chancellor prof Karamjeet Singh, following a recent international tour, announced that the university is set to establish a Chair of Guru Nanak Dev Sikh Studies on the campus, supported by an endowment exceeding ₹3 crore funded primarily by Punjabi NRIs. The Chair will focus on research related to the spiritual and philosophical teachings of Guru Nanak Dev. During his visit to Uzbekistan, Singh signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Samarkand State University to foster academic and cultural collaborations commemorating Guru Nanak Dev. In the United States, the plan for the Sikh Studies Chair took shape alongside scholarship programmes for students. In Canada, GNDU engaged with leading universities in British Columbia to explore joint research, faculty exchanges and innovative academic programmes. 'This visit has marked a significant step toward positioning GNDU as a global leader in integrated and future-ready education,' Singh said, highlighting the university's 'student-first' approach and focus on inclusive academic innovation. Addressing employment challenges faced by Indian graduates, the VC emphasised GNDU's initiatives to equip students with entrepreneurial skills. He said that while approximately 30 lakh students graduate annually in India, only 10 lakh secure jobs. To bridge this gap, GNDU is launching entrepreneurship courses and training programmes to help students create their own ventures. The university has also introduced forward-looking programmes in artificial intelligence, robotics, environmental science, design, journalism and business analytics to prepare students for emerging fields, the VC said. 'A rose garden will be established in the courtyard of the university campus. The fountain chowk will be re-design keeping in view the philosophy of Guru Nanak 's teachings,' the VC added.
