IFRS 9 in Indian Banking: NBFCs, ECL Provisioning and RBI Overlap

India's banking sector sits in an unusual position relative to IFRS 9. The rest of the world moved to the expected credit loss model in 2018. Indian NBFCs followed under Ind AS 109. Scheduled commercial banks did not. They continued provisioning under the RBI's incurred-loss IRAC norms. That divergence is now ending. On 27 April 2026, the RBI issued final directions on ECL provisioning for scheduled commercial banks, effective 1 April 2027, with a glide path to 31 March 2031. Uniqus

This post covers the full story: why banks were held back, how NBFCs have operated under Ind AS 109 in the meantime, what the RBI's ACPIR directions actually require, where the accounting and regulatory frameworks still diverge, and what it all means in practice for finance teams, auditors, and students preparing for Dip IFRS.

The Split: Why NBFCs Got ECL and Banks Did Not

When India rolled out Ind AS for corporates and NBFCs, the MCA roadmap required qualifying NBFCs with net worth above Rs 500 crore to adopt Ind AS from FY 2018-19. Ind AS 109 came with them, including the full ECL model. Bajaj Finance, HDFC Ltd (before its merger), Muthoot Finance, and large NBFC-MFIs all started computing ECL allowances using three-stage frameworks, provision matrices, and forward-looking PD/LGD/EAD models.

Scheduled commercial banks were supposed to follow in FY 2018-19. They did not. The RBI deferred implementation on 5 April 2018, then deferred again indefinitely in March 2019. The reasons were practical: Indian banks lacked the data infrastructure, the credit risk modelling capability, and the historical loss data needed to build robust ECL models. The regulatory capital implications were also significant. Moving from IRAC-based provisions to ECL-based provisions could have required material additional provisioning across the banking system, with consequences for CET-1 ratios at several public sector banks.

Gross NPAs of scheduled commercial banks fell to a 12-year low of approximately 2.31% by March 2025, down from 11.2% in FY18. Wright Research That improvement in asset quality over the intervening years has made the ECL transition considerably less disruptive than it would have been in 2018 or 2019. Banks entering the ECL framework with healthier books face smaller provisioning step-ups than they would have at peak stress.

How NBFCs Have Run Ind AS 109 in Practice

NBFCs have been applying Ind AS 109's ECL model for several years now. Their experience exposes the real-world complexity that the standard brings.

The dual-provisioning problem. NBFCs are required to maintain provisioning under both Ind AS 109 and RBI's IRAC norms. Where the ECL computed under Ind AS 109 is lower than the provision required under IRAC norms, the difference must be transferred to a separate Impairment Reserve, appropriated against profit or loss after taxes rather than charged as a P&L expense. No withdrawals from this reserve are permitted without RBI approval. Vinod Kothari Consultants

This creates a dual-track system. A large NBFC like Bajaj Finance runs its ECL models to compute Ind AS 109 provisions, then separately checks RBI's IRAC provisioning requirements, and recognises the higher of the two. When IRAC requires more provisioning than ECL (which is common for standard assets in certain sectors), the ECL charge in P&L is supplemented by the impairment reserve appropriation. When ECL exceeds IRAC (possible for deteriorating portfolios where Ind AS 109 front-loads provisions before 90-day NPA classification), the ECL provision stands.

Stage migration and NPA classification mismatch. Under Ind AS 109, an asset can move to Stage 3 (credit-impaired) before it reaches 90 days past due, if objective evidence of impairment exists earlier. Under RBI's IRAC norms, the 90-day threshold for NPA classification is a regulatory bright line. An NBFC may therefore carry an account as Stage 3 in its Ind AS books while the same account still shows as a standard asset or SMA-2 under IRAC classification. The two systems run in parallel and do not always agree.

Forward-looking adjustments in practice. Ind AS 109 requires ECL to incorporate forward-looking macroeconomic information. For a large NBFC with diversified portfolios, this means running scenario analysis: a base case, an upside, and a downside, weighted by probability. During COVID-19 lockdowns in FY21, NBFCs faced their first real stress-test of ECL models: historical loss rates massively understated the risk in unsecured retail portfolios and small-business lending. Forward-looking adjustments became the critical variable that separated conservative provisioners from optimistic ones.

The RBI's ACPIR Directions: What Banks Must Do from April 2027

The RBI's final ACPIR Directions, issued on 27 April 2026, introduce staging criteria for asset classification, update income recognition principles, and mandate robust governance and model risk management practices for ECL estimation. Regnology

The framework applies to scheduled commercial banks excluding small finance banks, payments banks, local area banks, and regional rural banks. SBI, HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Axis Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, and all major public sector banks are in scope.

Three-stage model, with floors. Unlike IFRS 9, which is principle-based, the RBI has introduced specific product-wise minimum provisioning floors for Stage 1 and Stage 2 exposures, acting as regulatory backstops. Regnology Standard corporate and retail loans attract a minimum Stage 1 provision of 0.40%, rising to 5% in Stage 2, with significantly higher provisioning mandated for Stage 3 assets depending on the duration of default. Business Standard

This is a material difference from pure IFRS 9. Under IFRS 9, ECL is whatever the model says it is: if PD is very low and LGD is modest, a Stage 1 provision of 0.05% is theoretically acceptable. The RBI's floors prevent that. Regardless of how conservative a bank's internal models are, Stage 1 corporate exposure cannot carry less than 0.40% provisioning.

SICR triggers. Loans overdue by more than 30 days automatically trigger SICR classification, requiring higher provisioning even if the account has not yet turned non-performing. The420 Banks must also maintain internal thresholds for rating downgrades, pricing changes, and macroeconomic deterioration as additional SICR indicators.

90-day NPA rule retained. The RBI has retained the existing 90-day delinquency norm for NPA classification, ensuring continuity in the identification of stressed assets even as provisioning norms undergo a structural shift. Business Standard This means the familiar SMA-0, SMA-1, SMA-2, NPA ladder continues to exist for regulatory classification purposes. What changes is the provisioning methodology layered on top of it.

EIR method introduced. The RBI also proposes a shift in income recognition from contractual interest rates to the effective interest rate method, aligning with IFRS 9 and Ind AS 109. Grant Thornton This requires reclassification of processing fees and upfront costs, system upgrades, and recalibration for legacy loan portfolios. Banks have been applying contractual rates for income recognition under IRAC norms for decades. The EIR shift is operationally significant.

Capital transition relief. The transitional adjustment, being the difference between ECL required as on 1 April 2027 and provisions held under current norms as on 31 March 2027, may be added back to CET-1 capital, with the impact phased out over the transition period to March 2031. Business Standard This prevents a cliff-edge capital event on day one of ECL adoption.

The NBFC-Bank Accounting Divergence: A Comparison

The period between 2018 and 2027 created a structural divergence in how banks and NBFCs report credit losses in India. The table below captures the key differences as they stand today and how they converge post-2027.

What This Means for Indian Bank Financials

Provisioning step-up on transition. Some banks will face higher provisions on their existing books when they move to ECL. The magnitude depends on portfolio composition. Banks heavy in commercial real estate, microfinance, and unsecured personal lending face larger step-ups than those concentrated in secured corporate lending or government-backed retail. Based on industry analysis, the impact on core capital from transitioning to Ind AS could be as high as 300 basis points for some banks ICRA Limited , though improved asset quality since those estimates were made should moderate that figure.

Revenue recognition changes. The EIR shift changes how banks report interest income. Processing fees collected upfront are deferred and amortised over the loan life under EIR rather than recognised immediately. Net interest margin calculations will look different on day one of adoption.

Income volatility from stage migrations. Under IRAC, provisioning increases gradually as an account ages through NPA buckets. Under ECL, a single significant credit event can trigger a Stage 2 migration and multiply the provision several times over immediately. Banks will experience more front-loaded P&L volatility than they do today, especially during economic downturns when SICR triggers fire across portfolios simultaneously.

Analyst implications. Post-2027, comparing Indian bank financials across periods will require careful reading. Provision coverage ratios, return on assets, and NIM figures will not be directly comparable to pre-2027 figures. Similarly, comparing an Indian bank's post-2027 financials with an NBFC's current Ind AS financials requires adjustment for the floor differences between the two frameworks.

SBI and HDFC Bank: What Preparation Looks Like

India's two largest lenders have been preparing for ECL adoption for several years.

SBI, with a loan book exceeding Rs 35 lakh crore and significant exposure to agriculture, infrastructure, and mid-corporate lending, faces the most complex ECL implementation in the system. Building reliable PD models for agricultural lending, where default drivers are monsoon-dependent rather than financially measurable, is a genuine modelling challenge. SBI has run parallel provisioning computations across its portfolios since at least FY24 as part of readiness exercises.

HDFC Bank, now merged with HDFC Ltd, operates one of India's largest retail lending portfolios covering home loans, personal loans, auto loans, and credit cards. Its NBFC subsidiary has already been running Ind AS 109 ECL models. The merger means HDFC Bank's teams have direct ECL implementation experience to draw on. The challenge is consistency: applying uniform SICR thresholds and LGD estimates across a merged portfolio with different historical loss experience in different product segments.

Ind AS 109 vs IFRS 9: Key Differences in the Indian Banking Context

What Big 4 Auditors Focus On

ECL model validation for NBFCs. For large NBFCs already on Ind AS 109, auditors engage credit risk specialists to independently validate PD, LGD, and EAD models. Model bias and optimistic assumptions are audit risks. A provision matrix using historical loss rates without meaningful forward-looking adjustment fails IFRS 9's requirements and will be challenged.

SICR completeness. The most audit-intensive area is whether accounts that should have migrated to Stage 2 have done so. Auditors cross-check credit monitoring data, covenant breach reports, rating migration data, and SMA classification reports against the entity's SICR policy. An NBFC or bank with no Stage 2 accounts, or with Stage 2 migration rates materially below peer institutions, raises an immediate flag.

Impairment reserve mechanics for NBFCs. Auditors verify that where RBI's IRAC provisions exceed Ind AS 109 ECL, the difference has been correctly appropriated to the impairment reserve rather than charged to P&L. Incorrect routing, such as taking the full IRAC provision as P&L expense rather than routing the excess to the reserve, misstates both the ECL charge and equity.

Transition readiness for banks. As April 2027 approaches, auditors will increasingly focus on whether banks have the data, models, and governance frameworks in place to produce reliable ECL figures from day one. Inadequate preparation is itself an audit finding.

Dip IFRS Exam Angle

Post 20 sits at the intersection of accounting standards and regulatory frameworks. Dip IFRS tests the accounting; understanding the Indian context requires knowing the regulatory layer.

Most tested areas:

The three-stage model: given a scenario describing a bank's loan portfolio, identify which stage applies and what the ECL recognition consequence is. The 30-day SICR rebuttable presumption and the 90-day credit-impairment rebuttable presumption are the key thresholds.

The higher-of rule for NBFCs: if the exam gives you an NBFC scenario where IRAC provisioning exceeds ECL, know that the difference goes to an impairment reserve, not to P&L. This is tested at the applied level.

Interest income on Stage 3 assets: EIR applies to net carrying amount (gross minus loss allowance), not gross carrying amount. The difference matters for any calculation question involving a credit-impaired loan.

Common traps:

Assuming Indian banks apply Ind AS 109 currently: they do not yet. Scheduled commercial banks apply IRAC norms until April 2027. NBFCs apply Ind AS 109. The distinction matters for scenario questions.

Ignoring prudential floors: a question about ECL for Indian banks post-2027 is not purely a pure IFRS 9 question. The RBI's mandatory floors change the minimum provision, regardless of what the model says.

Treating write-off as a P&L event: write-off reduces both gross carrying amount and loss allowance simultaneously. No net P&L impact at write-off. Recovery after write-off is a gain.

Enroll with Global Fin X

IFRS 9 in the Indian banking context is one of the most practically relevant areas in the Dip IFRS syllabus right now. The RBI's April 2027 transition makes it live, not theoretical. Our programme covers all four posts in the IFRS 9 series with dedicated lectures, worked examples, exam-style MCQs, and a LMS built for working professionals.

Enroll Now: Dip IFRS Programme

Faculty profile: www.globalfinx.in/manikanta

This is Post 20 of the Global Fin X IFRS Series. Previous: IFRS 9 Part 3: Hedge Accounting. Next: IFRS 9 Part 5: IFRS 9 vs IAS 39.