HDFC Bank vs ICICI Bank vs Axis Bank vs Bandhan Bank: Which bank stock offers high dividend, mcap and returns?
Among the four bank stocks, HDFC Bank holds the highest market capitalisation. As per NSE data (as of July 19), the total mcap of –
As per the BSE record, HDFC Bank paid dividend of Rs 22 in 2025. ICICI Bank and Axis Bank paid dividends of Rs 11 and Re 1, respectively. On the other hand, Bandhan Bank announced a dividend of Rs 1.50 with an ex-date and record date on August 14, 2025.
According to NSE (July 18), share price of HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Axis Bank and Bandhan Bank are – Rs 1956, Rs 1426.70, Rs 1098.70 and Rs 185.40, respectively.
According to the BSE analytics, shares of HDFC Bank in the last 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years and 10 years rose by 21.24 per cent, 16.71 per cent, 45.25 per cent, 78.08 per cent and 252.57 per cent, respectively.
Shares of ICICI Bank also gave positive returns in the last 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 5 years and 10 years by 14.14 per cent, 46.23 per cent, 84.79 per cent, 303.14 per cent and 394.42 per cent, respectively, according to BSE analytics.
As per BSE analytics, shares of Axis Bank fell 16.04 per cent in the last 1 year. However, in the last 2 year, 3 years, 5 years and 10 years, shares of the private sector bank gained 14.08 per cent, 60.58 per cent, 153.63 per cent and 82.48 per cent, respectively.
Shares of Bandhan Bank gave negative returns in the past 1 year, 2 years, 3 years and 5 years by 4.47 per cent, 12.65 per cent, 33.32 per cent and 46.95 per cent, respectively, as per BSE analytics.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
23 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Taxpayer wins Rs 1.4 lakh penalty case despite claiming false income tax deductions to reduce income by 50%; Know the details
ET Online ITAT: Penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh deleted despite a taxpayer claiming false income tax deductions to reduce his income by 50%; Know the details The Income Tax Department imposed a penalty equivalent to 17% of Mr Shinde's salary after it was proved that he had claimed false income tax deductions to under-report his income by about 50% to lower his net income tax liability. The penalty imposed by the income tax department amounted to Rs 1.4 lakh. Shinde's actual salary was Rs 8 lakh a year, which he reported as only Rs 4 lakh. Although this might look like a fair punishment for someone who wilfully evaded paying income tax, Mr Shinde argued in court that he was just an innocent employee with a technical background. He said that like him, many other employees from companies like Ceat, Bosch, HAL, Mahindra and Mahindra among others, relied on a tax consultant named Mr Patil to file their Income Tax Returns (ITRs). Patil assured them that he was an expert in tax law and could legally calculate a lower tax, leading to a refund of the TDS deducted by their employer. Shinde's lawyers told ITAT Pune: 'The assessee was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return (ITR) filed by Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act.' Shinde also informed the court that as soon as he found out about this illegal act of claiming false tax deductions, he had filed a complaint in the Economic Offence Wing, Maharashtra Police against Patil. Moreover, Shinde also paid the full tax amount plus interest, just like he was supposed to, without claiming any bogus tax deductions. However, the income tax department stated that even though he returned the owed tax with interest, he should still face penalty for committing this offence and for not voluntarily submitting a revised first, Shinde filed an appeal against the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh that the tax department slapped on him with the Commissioner of Appeals (CIT (Appeals)). However, CIT (Appeals) rejected the appeal, leading Shinde to take his case to ITAT Pune. There, he won the case and the entire penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh was cancelled. The main reason why Shinde won this case is because ITAT Pune recognized his good behavior. Shinde, pointed out the illegal actions of his tax consultant (Patil) and also returned the full amount of the income tax owed, along with interest, just as the law required. ITAT Pune said: '....It is found that when the notice under Section 148 was issued, the appellant (Shinde) has disclosed his correct income & paid the due tax before issue of notice. We also find that the Assessing Officer of Income Tax Department has accepted the return (ITR) as it is which was furnished by the appellant (Shinde) in response to the notice u/s 148. We cannot accept the contention of Ld. DR (income tax department lawyer) that the revised return (revised ITR) was not voluntary, therefore the penalty u/s 270(A) of the Act is inevitable….'Check out the info below to find out why and under what circumstances Shinde managed to win this income tax penalty case despite claiming false tax deductions to declare lower income and pay less tax. How did this income tax penalty case for claiming false tax deductions start? According to ITAT Pune judgement dated May 8, 2025. Here's the timeline of events: FY 2017-18: Patil filed Shinde's ITR declaring taxable income of Rs 4 lakh (407,090) by claiming multiple income tax deductions. Patil filed Shinde's ITR declaring taxable income of Rs 4 lakh (407,090) by claiming multiple income tax deductions. May 28, 2019: Shinde came to know that Patil claimed excess tax refund by claiming many false tax deductions. He immediately paid back the due tax with interest. However, the revised ITR could not be filed voluntarily since the date to file one was over. Shinde came to know that Patil claimed excess tax refund by claiming many false tax deductions. He immediately paid back the due tax with interest. However, the revised ITR could not be filed voluntarily since the date to file one was over. February 2020: The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO), on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Officer, (Investigation), that Shinde has claimed excess deductions, initiated proceeding under Section 147 after obtaining approval from the authorities and accordingly, a notice under Section 148 was issued. The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO), on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Officer, (Investigation), that Shinde has claimed excess deductions, initiated proceeding under Section 147 after obtaining approval from the authorities and accordingly, a notice under Section 148 was issued. March 11, 2020: Shinde filed an ITR in response to notice under Section 148, declaring taxable income of Rs 8 lakh (8,32,990). Shinde filed an ITR in response to notice under Section 148, declaring taxable income of Rs 8 lakh (8,32,990). March 2, 2021: The Income Tax Department completed the assessment of Shinde's ITR under Section 147 by accepting it. The Income Tax Department completed the assessment of Shinde's ITR under Section 147 by accepting it. September 12, 2021: The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) under Section 270A(8) for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting. Shinde filed an appeal in CIT (A) against this penalty order. The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) under Section 270A(8) for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting. Shinde filed an appeal in CIT (A) against this penalty order. September 27, 2024: CIT (Appeals) dismissed Shinde's appeal and confirmed the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) imposed u/s 270A(8). It is this order of CIT (Appeals) against which Shinde filed an appeal before ITAT (Pune). Also read: Income Tax Bill 2025: Income from house property taxation related two key amendments suggested by select committee, know the impact ITAT Pune's investigation found that Shinde was cheated by Patil to conduct this tax fraud According to the judgement order, here's what ITAT Pune said:(No part of the judgement is altered and the same is presented below as it is) 'We find that the assessee (Shinde) is a salaried employee & belongs to a technical background. The return (ITR) of most of the employees of CEAT LTD, Bosch Company, HAL & M & M including that of the assessee (Shinde) was filed by a tax consultant namely Patil. We further find that the assessee (Shinde) came to know from other employees in the company that Patil with his expertise is able to legally calculate lower tax, resulting in a refund of TDS deducted by the employer. The assessee (Shinde) was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by Patil & truly believed that the returns (ITR) are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant, who without informing him & others, claimed excess deduction under chapter VI-A of the IT Act & claimed refund. It was Patil who cheated all the employees & claimed excess deduction in their returns without informing them for his own benefit. The fact of the cheating came to light when a survey u/s 133A was conducted at the premises of Patil. When the fact that this kind of fraud was made in the name of a number of persons all of them complaint to the Economic Offence Wing of Police, against the tax consultant Patil. It is also apparent that there is no mistake of the assessee but it was the hidden interest of the tax consultant who triggered the gun by using the shoulders of the assessee & many more for his own benefit.' Also read: Capital gain on property: How to pay lower LTCG tax using indexation benefit What did ITAT Pune say about Shinde's action post the fraud coming to his notice According to the judgement order, here's what ITAT Pune said: It is also found that as soon as the fact of excess deduction claimed, came to the knowledge of the assessee (Shinde) he immediately paid the due tax with interest, even before the issue of notice under Section 148 & contacted another genuine tax consultant who prepared and furnished correct return in response to the notice under Section 148. We find that the Assessing Officer has levied a penalty under Section 270(A) of Rs 1,46,760 on the basis of the fact that the correct income was not returned voluntarily but only after issue of notice under Section 148. It is also found that when the notice under Section 148 was issued the appellant (Shinde) has disclosed his correct income & paid the due tax before issue of notice. We also find that the Income Tax Department Assessing Officer has accepted the return as it is, which was furnished by the appellant (Shinde) in response to the notice under Section 148. ITAT Pune final judgement ITAT Pune deleted the tax notice and thus the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh stood what ITAT Pune said: We cannot accept the contention of Ld. DR (Income Tax Department lawyer) that the revised return was not voluntary therefore the penalty under Section 270(A) is inevitable. In this regard the contention of counsel (Shinde's lawyer) is also important wherein he stated that the due tax along-with interest was already paid before the issue of notice under Section 148 & admittedly the return of income (ITR) could not be filed as the due date was already over. We find force in the arguments of the counsel of the assessee (Shinde) that the amount of tax & interest was deposited voluntarily much prior to the issue of notice under Section 148 since the income tax with interest was deposited by the assessee on 28-05-2019 whereas the notice under Section 148 was issued on 25-02-2020. Judgement: 'Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to impose penalty u/s 270(A) & accordingly the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set-aside & the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the penalty of Rs 1,46,760 imposed u/s 270(A). Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.' What is the significance of this judgement for other taxpayers? ET Wealth Online reached out to a number of lawyers and chartered accountants to get their take on the importance of this judgement for other taxpayers. Here's what they said: Rahul Sateeja, Partner, DMD Advocates, says: 'This ruling marks a significant development in tax penalty jurisprudence. It emphasises that even under the newer Section 270A regime, tax penalties are not merely about ticking boxes but involve a fair process that considers the taxpayer's intent and actions. The key takeaway from this ruling is that it reassures taxpayers that if they are honest and proactive—even when faced with mistakes or misleading advice—they are protected by law. Salaried taxpayers and those relying on consultants now see a tribunal recognising their situation and not penalising them for third-party misleading advice or fraud.' Gopal Bohra, direct tax partner, N. A. Shah Associates LLP says: 'In this case, the taxpayer was unaware about the incorrect or excessive claims made by the consultant in his income tax return and had relied entirely upon the consultant's expertise. Subsequently, when he came to know about the incorrect or excessive claim in his return, he promptly recomputed the correct tax liability and interest thereon and voluntarily deposited. This he has done before any notice could be issued by the tax department and this proactive approach saved him from penal consequences. While the applicability of this decision to other cases would depend on the specific facts involved, however, this may serve as a relevant precedent in a situation where a taxpayer voluntarily pays the correct tax and interest before receiving any notice, and is able to demonstrate bona fide reliance on third party consultant along with a lack of his personal knowledge of the tax laws.' Kunal Savani, Partner, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, says: 'This is a welcome judgment, particularly in times where taxpayers often face genuine hardship in filing a revised ITR beyond the prescribed due date. The judgment also underscores the bona fide of a taxpayer and the principle that the taxpayer must approach with clean hands, as was demonstrated in this case, where the taxpayer proactively paid the taxes along with applicable interest immediately upon being made aware of the consultant's error, and notably, even before receiving any demand notice.' Ritika Nayyar, Partner, Singhania & Co., says: 'The judgment lays emphasis that due to the assessee's bonafide intentions, proactiveness to make things right, no intention of tax evasion would have weightage over mistakes done in ITR without his knowledge, even if it led to under reporting of income. If the assessee due to his different technical background, fully relied on his tax consultant, who undertook a fraudulent act for which the assessee had no knowledge and as soon as he became aware, he rectified it suo moto, and should not be held responsible or punished ( be it financially) for someone else's malafide act. So if one is aware and prompt in his corrective actions, along with facts and evidence, he can demonstrate his genuine position and get relief from such a penalty.' Jay N. Bhansali, Advocate, Bombay High court, says: 'In the said case, involving peculiar facts, the Appellate Tribunal held that improper deduction claimed in reliance on professional advice—being influenced by an advisor's hidden agenda—should not attract penalties if there was no willful intent by the taxpayer to evade tax. It further clarified that taxpayers who voluntarily correct such errors and pay taxes before detection may be spared from penal consequences. The ruling reaffirms the principle that not every ineligible claim warrants a penalty, especially in cases of bona fide error. With the Income-tax Department intensifying scrutiny of improper deductions, this decision offers timely relief to similarly affected taxpayers.' N.R. Narayana Murthy Founder, Infosys Watch Now Harsh Mariwala Chairman & Founder, Marico Watch Now Adar Poonawalla CEO, Serum Institute of India Watch Now Ronnie Screwvala Chairperson & Co-founder, upGrad Watch Now Puneet Dalmia Managing Director, Dalmia Bharat group Watch Now Martin Schwenk Former President & CEO, Mercedes-Benz, Thailand Watch Now Nadir Godrej Managing Director, of Godrej Industries Watch Now Manu Jain Former- Global Vice President, Xiaomi Watch Now Nithin Kamath Founder, CEO, Zerodha Watch Now Anil Agarwal Executive Chairman, Vedanta Resources Watch Now Dr. Prathap C. Reddy Founder Chairman, Apollo Hospitals Watch Now Vikram Kirloskar Former Vice Chairman, Toyota Kirloskar Motor Watch Now Kiran Mazumdar Shaw Executive Chairperson, Biocon Limited Watch Now Shashi Kiran Shetty Chairman of Allcargo Logistics, ECU Worldwide and Gati Ltd Watch Now Samir K Modi Managing Director, Modi Enterprises Watch Now R Gopalakrishnan Former Director Tata Sons, Former Vice Chairman, HUL Watch Now Sanjiv Mehta Former Chairman / CEO, Hindustan Unilever Watch Now Dr Ajai Chowdhry Co-Founder, HCL, Chairman EPIC Foundation, Author, Just Aspire Watch Now Shiv Khera Author, Business Consultant, Motivational Speaker Watch Now Nakul Anand Executive Director, ITC Limited Watch Now RS Sodhi Former MD, Amul & President, Indian Dairy Association Watch Now Anil Rai Gupta Managing Director & Chairman, Havells Watch Now Zia Mody Co-Founder & Managing Partner, AZB & Partners Watch Now Arundhati Bhattacharya Chairperson & CEO, Salesforce India Watch Now
Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
Nestlé India Q1 profit falls 12% on higher input, finance costs
New Delhi: Nestlé India Ltd's profit fell in the June quarter because of input cost pressure and higher finance costs for the maker of Maggi noodles and KitKat chocolate. The packaged food company's profit after tax dropped 11.7% year-on-year to ₹ 659.2 crore in the first quarter of FY26, according to its exchange disclosures on Thursday. Total sales grew 5.8% year-on-year to ₹ 5,074 crore during the quarter. The company's expenses increased 9.25%, driven by higher finance and interest costs on employee benefits. "The quarter was impacted by elevated consumption prices across the commodity portfolio. In addition, we witnessed higher operations costs as a result of significant expansion in manufacturing in the last seven to eight months,' said Suresh Narayanan, chairman and managing director, Nestlé India. 'Moreover, borrowing from commercial banks to fund temporary operational cash-flow requirements resulted in higher finance costs in the quarter.' However, Narayanan said, 'We have noticed stabilizing prices for edible oil and cocoa, a declining trend in coffee and stabilizing to modest increase in pricing of milk.' Ebitda at ₹ 1,101.0 crore was flat year-on-year and 6% below estimates of ₹ 1,173 crore, driven by gross margin compression and higher operating expenses. Ebitda is earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization, a measure of operational profitability. The company delivered balanced growth in three out of its four product group categories. Nestlé, which sells coffee, noodles, chocolates, packaged milk, yogurt, and pet food, experienced high input costs over the past few quarters as prices of coffee and cocoa remained elevated. However, coffee prices are expected to remain range-bound at current lower levels, as the upcoming Vietnam crop appears to be normal, the company said. Cocoa and edible oil prices have stabilized and remain range-bound. Milk prices are anticipated to decrease with the onset of a favourable monsoon and flush season, the company said. Analysts said Nestlé's volume growth was 'modest' and the company missed margin expectations due to input cost pressure. 'Nestlé's top-line momentum remains muted for the fifth consecutive quarter, impacted by a broader urban demand slowdown,' brokerage Equirus Research said in a note. 'While key categories such as beverages, confectionery, and prepared dishes saw healthy traction, overall growth was weighed down by continued weakness in the nutrition portfolio. Commodity cost trends warrant close monitoring, as margin recovery may remain constrained in the near term.' Shares of Nestlé closed 5.41% lower at ₹ 2,320.15 apiece on the BSE on Thursday compared with a 0.66% decline in the benchmark Sensex. The prepared dishes and cooking aids category swung back to volume growth, recording double-digit rise for Maggi noodles, said Narayanan. The confectionery category saw high double-digit growth, driven by underlying volume growth. The milk products and nutrition category reported a mixed performance, with certain segments showing growth while a few recording a muted performance. E-commerce maintained its growth momentum, contributing 12.5% of domestic sales, driven by quick commerce and new launches.
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
BigBasket feels qcomm heat; PhysicsWallah clears Sebi test
Next BigBasket feels qcomm heat; PhysicsWallah clears Sebi test Want this newsletter delivered to your inbox? Also in the letter: BigBasket loses steam as quick commerce intensifies Driving the news: Tata Sons' FY25 annual report reveals a 3% dip in turnover for BigBasket's business-to-consumer (B2C) unit, Innovative Retail Concepts, which clocked Rs 7,673 crore. Its business-to-business (B2B) arm, Supermarket Grocery Supplies, fared worse, falling 7% to Rs 2,227 crore. Losses for the B2C business widened sharply to Rs 1,851 crore, up from Rs 1,267 crore in FY24. Between the lines: Tata 1mg back in investment mode after strong FY25 growth By the numbers: Consolidated revenue jumped 20% year-on-year (YoY) to Rs 2,392 crore. Tata 1mg Technologies, its main entity, posted Rs 375 crore in revenue and Rs 65 crore in PAT (tripling YoY). Subsidiary Tata 1mg Healthcare recorded revenue of Rs 2,016 crore but a Rs 342 crore loss. The big picture: Also Read: PhysicsWallah gets Sebi nod, set to raise Rs 4,000 crore in IPO Driving the news: Catch up quick: By the numbers: Zoom out: SuperK raises Rs 100 crore from Binny Bansal, Mithun Sacheti; cricketer Shubman Gill joins cap table Deal details: The round was led by Flipkart cofounder Binny Bansal's 3State Ventures and CaratLane founder Mithun Sacheti. Existing investors Blume Ventures and Xeed Ventures also participated. Adding a touch of star power, Indian Test skipper Shubman Gill also joined the captable. By the numbers: What's next: Catch up quick: CBDT sharpens AI tools for tax crackdown ahead of new law Driving the news: A recent crackdown prompted taxpayers to withdraw Rs 963 crore in deduction claims and pay an additional Rs 409 crore in tax. Zoom out: The taxpayer base has tripled from 30 million in FY14 to 90 million in FY25, thanks to digitisation and pre-filled ITRs – 99% of which are being accepted without edits. Alphabet Q2 profit jumps 19% as AI demand powers cloud, YouTube By the numbers: AI Overviews now serve over 2 billion monthly users globally, and AI Mode – introduced in India and the US – has already hit 100 million monthly users. What's new: Zoom in: Tesla braces for rough quarters as EV subsidies fade, autonomy bets rise What's the matter: Between the lines: Also Read: A decline in BigBasket's turnover indicates increasing competition from quick commerce players. This and more in today's ETtech Top 5.■ Shubman Gill puts on investor cap■ Taxman's AI■ Alphabet & Tesla: Two tales of Q2Tata Digital-owned BigBasket is feeling the heat as quick commerce players like Blinkit, Zepto, and Swiggy Instamart tighten their grip on urban grocery demand. The pressure is showing in the Tata Group has voiced internal concerns about BigBasket's sluggish execution, as we reported earlier this year. As a sign of its intent, the conglomerate began scouting for $1.3 billion in new capital in April, of which $1 billion is earmarked for BigBasket contrast, Tata Digital's epharmacy arm, 1mg, has bounced back with strong momentum After raising only $40 million since 2021 (when Tata acquired a majority stake), 1mg is now pursuing a $300 million external fundraise to expand offline operations and develop logistics, marking a shift from Tata's earlier debt-led digital founder Alakh PandeyPhysicsWallah has secured Securities and Exchange Board of India's (Sebi) approval to go public , becoming the first venture-backed Indian edtech startup to clear the regulatory hurdle for an Noida-based firm confidentially filed IPO papers in March under the pre-filing route and now plans to raise Rs 4,000 crore at a valuation of Rs 35,000–40,000 crore. Sebi's approval came through on July 18, according to by WestBridge Capital, Lightspeed, GSV Ventures, and Hornbill Capital, PhysicsWallah last raised $210 million in September 2023, pegging its valuation at $2.8 revenue crossed Rs 4,000 crore, as we reported earlier, more than doubling from Rs 1,940 crore in FY24. However, net losses widened to Rs 1,131 crore, mainly due to surging employee now joins a growing IPO queue of new-age startups, including Meesho Pine Labs , and Urban Company . Together, this cohort could unlock over Rs 18,000 crore in fresh capital this Thontepu (left) and Neeraj MentaSuperK, a value-first grocery retailer operating in small towns, has raised Rs 100 crore in fresh funding The retailer grew nearly 15% in FY25, up from Rs 85 crore the previous year. It now targets an annualised Rs 2,000–3,000 crore business in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana alone over the next five years. The latest round values the company at 2–2.5x its previous Rs 160 crore plans to expand to 300 towns and venture into smartphones and appliances. It is also strengthening its Costco-style membership scheme, which has helped double monthly in 2020 by Neeraj Menta (ex-Flipkart) and Anil Thontepu (ex-PhonePe), SuperK currently operates 130 stores across more than 80 towns in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, employing a franchise-led Income Tax Department is stepping up its use of artificial intelligence and big data to crack down on evasion ahead of a new income tax law in 2026, Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) chairman Ravi Agrawal told with over 6.5 billion digital transactions and data-sharing agreements with foreign tax bodies, the department is pushing analytics-led audits and behavioural nudges to drive voluntary April 2022, over 11 million updated returns have been filed, generating Rs 11,000 crore in additional tax reported a robust second quarter, with net profit increasing 19% year-over-year to $28.2 billion, supported by ongoing momentum in cloud computing and a deeper integration of AI across its platforms. New launches, including key rollouts in India, added to the climbed 14% YoY to $96.4 billion. Google Cloud led the charge with a 32% jump, touching $13.62 Sundar Pichai underlined the growing traction of AI Mode in answering complex queries. Next in line are Deep Search and advanced personalisation features. Meanwhile, Alphabet plans to increase its capital expenditure for 2025 to $85 billion, up from earlier estimates, citing a surge in demand for AI generated $9.8 billion in global advertising revenue. Its 'Other Bets' portfolio, which includes Waymo, contributed $373 million to the overall is gearing up for a challenging period as the US government scales back electric vehicle subsidies. CEO Elon Musk warned of a ' few rough quarters ahead ,' even as the company doubles down on self-driving tech and its upcoming robotaxi service. Second-quarter revenue fell 12% year-on-year to $22.5 billion — Tesla's steepest decline in over a decade. Global deliveries dropped 13.5% and adjusted profit per share missed estimates at 40 cents. Revenue from regulatory credits plunged 51%.Musk's narrative now hinges on autonomy, both in consumer EVs and the Cybercab platform, slated for a late-2025 launch. A new affordable EV model was quietly produced in June, though details remain scarce. Tesla also flagged delays in scaling production.
