K-RERA Enforcement Live Since 1 April: How to Verify Your Bengaluru Project's FY24-25 Audit Filing

Karnataka's real estate regulator, K-RERA, formally commenced Section 38(1) and Section 60 enforcement on 1 April 2026 against promoters that missed the 31 December 2025 deadline for submitting FY24-25 annual audit reports under Section 4(2)(l)(D) of the RERA Act, according to The Hans India coverage of the penalty schedule. Projects with capital outlay below Rs 25 crore face a penalty of about Rs 20,000, with scaled-up penalties for larger projects. A separate K-RERA circular dated 20 January 2026 also imposes Section 38(1) and Section 61 penalties for delayed Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) submissions for FY25-26. For Bengaluru buyers in any active project, this is the most consequential regulatory shift of the year, and the verification work is more important than the headline.

What did K-RERA actually announce?

The regulator invoked Sections 38(1) and 60 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, against promoters who failed to file the mandatory annual audit reports for FY24-25 by the final extended deadline of 31 December 2025. Earlier deadlines had been extended on 12 September, 15 November, 12 December and 20 January, per LiveLaw and rerafiling.com coverage of the regulator's circulars. The penalty schedule starts at about Rs 20,000 for smaller projects and scales up for projects above the Rs 25 crore threshold. K-RERA also passed orders during this enforcement window against Ozone Infra Developers (Rs 19.87 lakh interest awarded for a four-year delay) and Casagrande Garden City (Rs 52.74 lakh refund directed for unfair GST charges), per the LiveLaw monthly digest.

Why does this matter for a Bengaluru buyer?

Because the audit filing is the single best public-domain proxy for whether the developer is keeping its statutory housekeeping in order. A project that has filed FY24-25 audit reports on time is signalling discipline across the rest of its compliance stack, including escrow account discipline, fund utilisation, and customer reporting. Conversely, a project that missed the 31 December 2025 deadline despite four extensions is signalling either operational stress, willful non-compliance, or both. Either is reason for additional buyer caution. The Section 38(1) action is a public document that any buyer can verify on the K-RERA portal at rera.karnataka.gov.in.

What is the verification playbook for a buyer's specific project?

Three steps. First, locate the project's K-RERA registration number on the developer's brochure or sales page; this is mandatory disclosure under Section 13. Second, navigate to rera.karnataka.gov.in, search by registration number, and check the project's compliance tab for FY24-25 audit submission status. Third, separately check the project's QPR filing history; the 20 January 2026 circular requires QPRs to be filed within 30 days of each quarter end. A project that is current on both counts is in good regulatory standing; a project that has gaps is not necessarily a deal-breaker, but it raises the bar for additional in-person verification before booking. If the developer claims the registration number is not yet listed because the project is in pre-launch, treat that as a hold signal; you can always wait for the formal registration to complete before transferring funds, and any insistence on pre-registration payment is itself a red flag worth examining.

How does this fit K-RERA's broader enforcement posture in 2026?

The regulator is moving from passive registration management to active enforcement, which is a real shift. Across early 2026, K-RERA has been issuing orders against promoters in cases ranging from delayed possession (Ozone Infra) to unfair GST charges (Casagrande Garden City) to non-submission of compliance documents. The Section 38(1) action is the systematic version of this, applied at scale. For buyers, this is good news in the medium term, because every penalty notice issued raises the cost of non-compliance for promoters and tightens the discipline gap between the best and the median developer. In the short term, it means that for any pre-launch booking, the buyer should treat regulator-side data as more reliable than developer-side claims.

What does the QPR enforcement add to the picture?

It closes one of the most common gaps in buyer-side diligence. QPRs are quarterly progress reports that developers must file with K-RERA showing physical and financial progress against milestones. The 20 January 2026 circular brings the same Section 38(1)/Section 61 penalty regime to QPRs, which means a developer that habitually files QPRs late is now also exposed to financial penalties on each delayed filing. For a buyer, this means the QPR filing date is now a real signal, not a paperwork formality. A project where QPRs are consistently filed on time is one where the developer's site office and finance team are coordinated; the opposite is a yellow flag worth additional verification. The simplest single check: pull the QPR filing dates for the last four quarters, look for any gap longer than 30 days from quarter end, and flag any that exceed that window.

Which builders have been named in K-RERA orders this year?

Two prominent ones are Ozone Infra Developers, against whom K-RERA awarded Rs 19.87 lakh in interest for a four-year possession delay, and Casagrande Garden City, against which K-RERA directed a Rs 52.74 lakh refund for unfair GST charges, both per the LiveLaw monthly digest. These are individual orders, not blanket penalties, and they reflect the regulator's willingness to award meaningful financial relief to buyers in specific complaints. The takeaway for any buyer with a live grievance is that the K-RERA complaint process is materially active in 2026, and an under-construction issue documented and filed correctly has a reasonable chance of obtaining relief.

Does this change how you should evaluate a new launch?

It adds a non-negotiable verification step. For any project on your shortlist, including Brigade Gunjur in Whitefield or Sanjeevini Adwaith in the same corridor, the buyer should verify both FY24-25 audit submission and the latest QPR filing on the K-RERA portal before agreeing to any payment beyond the booking amount. A clean compliance status is not a guarantee of project quality, but a missed deadline is a direct signal that your money is going into a process under regulatory tension, which substantially raises the diligence threshold.

What are the genuine risks even for a compliant project?

Two. First, K-RERA registration and audit compliance are necessary but not sufficient. They confirm the developer is meeting statutory minimums, but they do not certify construction quality, possession date reliability, or amenity delivery. Buyers still need to walk the site, talk to existing buyers in earlier phases, and review the developer's last three deliveries. Second, the regulator's enforcement bandwidth is finite, which means complaints take time to resolve; for a buyer looking at a project where complaints are pending, the absence of a final order is not the same as innocence, and the pendency itself is information.

What is the next milestone worth watching?

Two. First, K-RERA's expected publication of a penalty list against promoters who missed the FY24-25 audit deadline; the names on that list become publicly verifiable signals for buyers in the affected projects. Second, the next quarterly cycle of QPR filings, due roughly within 30 days of 30 June 2026 quarter end, which will be the first full reporting cycle under the 20 January 2026 circular's penalty regime. If QPR filing rates rise meaningfully across that cycle, the regulator's posture is working; if they remain low, expect further enforcement notices.

What should a buyer do in the next 30 to 90 days?

First, run the K-RERA verification on every project on your shortlist, regardless of how prominent the developer is. A quarterly progress report missed at a Tier-one developer is just as material as one missed at a small builder. Second, if you are already in an under-construction project, request a copy of the developer's most recent QPR submission and the FY24-25 audit cover page; both are public documents and the developer should provide them on written request. Third, if any project on your shortlist surfaces gaps, weight the alternative options on your list more heavily before booking. Compliance discipline is a leading indicator of execution discipline.

If you want a quick read on a Bengaluru project's positioning before doing the deeper K-RERA check, our review of Abhee Codename New Dimension in the Sarjapur corridor walks through the buyer-side trade-offs and the K-RERA framing for that specific tower; the same analytical lens applies across the rest of our project coverage, and we treat the regulator's compliance dashboard as the first verification stop on every project we review.

By PropNewz Team