RBI seemingly cannot Interpret its OWN Guidelines (HDFC Cc Case)

[desiviru]

@the fiasco I am of the opinion here that rewards redemption for statement cash is different from what RBI rules says. So banks here are well within their rights to adjust it in next statement because it is not a transaction based entry. It is rewarded for actual transactions and are not part of the transactions itself. Any refund full or partial are part of transaction but not these rewards.

Also, SBI never adjusts in current statement. They take it as a payment and shows it only in next statement. Adustment in current statement means your total due reduced by that much amount at first hand. Suppose you had a Rs.2000 txn with 100 cashback. Still this 100 will be adjusted as payment in next statement else we had due of 1900 irself firsthand. I hope you get my point here.

Same way when I redeem Millennia cashpoints in current statement, they adjust from another due in next statement or if no txn are there which is rare with me, the credit balance stands for those redemptions.

 

[Dr.Anand456Dr.Anand456 is verified member.]

DISAGREE. None of the rules set by a bank can override RBI guidelines. The rules have to be designed to be within the boundaries defined by RBI.

I respect your view, but allow me to clarify the context.

You're absolutely right that no bank rule can override RBI guidelines. However, it's important to understand that the RBI provides a regulatory framework within which banks are allowed to design their card features and operational processes — as long as they don’t violate any core principles set by the RBI.

In this particular case, HDFC Bank has clearly mentioned the cashback adjustment timeline in its MITC, and RBI has reviewed this matter. As per the response received, RBI found that HDFC’s process is in line with the Master Directions issued for Credit Card operations. That means the bank's policy is not overriding RBI guidelines, but rather functioning within them.

So while your point is correct in principle, in practical terms, banks have some flexibility under RBI's framework — and unless there's a clear breach or unfair practice, RBI does not interfere with every individual policy detail.

 

[the fiasco]

Point 1. "Credit amount arising out of 'refund/failed/reversed" gets adjusted ...as you rightly noted. (You are not questioning this, right?)

Point 2. "Similar transactions" Reward redemption is not a similar transaction.

Some reasons....
(a) Reward points accumulate in a different reward point account. Refunds, failed transactions, reversals, and cancelled transactions cannot accumulate elsewhere; they are always on an individual transaction basis and out of the direct control of the cardholder regarding when they get credited.

+1 - Totally agreed

Simple answer:- refund/failed/reversed transaction is different from cashback redemption. They are not of similar nature.

@the fiasco I am of the opinion here that rewards redemption for statement cash is different from what RBI rules says. So banks here are well within their rights to adjust it in next statement because it is not a transaction based entry. It is rewarded for actual transactions and are not part of the transactions itself. Any refund full or partial are part of transaction but not these rewards.

Thank You all for the responses.

Hear me out once.....

I initially thought the same that most of you have, that cashback is different from refund/ failed or reversed transaction. Yes, that is true. But I differ on the interpretation of the guideline. Here's an eg first, to provide a context.

I have read almost all thread of @SJM on RBI. Idr exactly but in one such complaint ( regd duplicate cibil enquiry) he received less or no compensation. AND that is because RBI said that 30 days time is taken from the day you share your CIBIL REPORT to the BANK.

This behavior of RBI is something I would describe as being PRECISE with the guidelines. And that's how it should be! no doubt

Coming to my Case

1) @2025 You omitted the first word from the guideline. The guideline states ' ANY Credit Amount'.
Also, Nowhere has the term merchant or transaction or Reward Points has been used. AFAI am able to interpret, it can be any credit amount.

2) Reward redemption is the wrong end of the stick. I think we should be focusing on the Cashback.

When one does Reward Redemption in Hdfc, it is posted in the form of CASH to the Credit Card Account. Rewards in their own sense have 0 value (something said by admin of the forum as well) . It is the Cash that is posted, that has value.
And this Cash, is posted as a Direct Credit.
Thereby, ideally making it a part of guideline as it states 'Any Credit amount'

3) Similar transactions here depicts a similar scenario OTHER than refund/ failed/ reversed scenarios. That is because these 3 scenarios are not conclusive in nature and to summarize or bring in other scenarios the word similar has been used.

If similar means the same as refund/ reversed/ failed why even include the word then. The Guideline could have simply been 'Any credit amount arising out of refund/ reversed/ failed transaction for which the payme........... '

If RBI is so precise in sjmajumdar's case, that the DATE the report is shared is taken into consideration, they should have been precise in interpreting this guideline as well.

DISAGREE. None of the rules set by a bank can override RBI guidelines. The rules have to be designed to be within the boundaries defined by RBI.

Forget the Reward points. The way the Guideline is mentioned - > It deals with ANY Credit Amount that is posted cause of failed/ refund/ reversed or even other similar scenarios. And here, the Credit Amount maybe because of Reward Points, but essentially it is a Credit Amount. And hence, it should come within the boundaries defined by the RBI for what needs to be done when there is -> ANY Credit amount arising out of........

Here's another eg
Idfc First Bank charges Joining Fee for their Metal Cards by intimating the customer in advance. Whereas, the guidelines clearly state that the joining fee can only be charged after Card Activation.

If EVERY Bank can just add a CLAUSE in their MITC to Mitigate and avoid the Guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India, which is the Regulatory Body for ALL Banks, then what is even the USE of RBI Guidelines ?

 

[hender]

Long Story Short,

Hdfc has mentioned in its MITC that cashback received against redemption of points will be adjusted in the following billing cycle (not the current)

HOWEVER

As per The RBI Master Direction Circular

View attachment 95365

What Hdfc is doing is in complete contradiction to the Guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India. AFAIK, Icici and SBI adjust the Cashback within the Same statement.

I raised an RBI Complaint asking them ONE simple question :
' How can HDFC have a clause in their MITC that is powerful enough to AVOID a particular Guideline set by the Banking Regulator of this country, The Reserve Bank of India ?'

Here's the Response I have got from RBI.

View attachment 95366

HDFC and RBI are not wrong. Your perspective was one-sided in nature. My point of view.

Point 1. "Credit amount arising out of 'refund/failed/reversed" gets adjusted ...as you rightly noted. (You are not questioning this, right?)

Point 2. "Similar transactions" Reward redemption is not a similar transaction.

Some reasons....
(a) Reward points accumulate in a different reward point account. Refunds, failed transactions, reversals, and cancelled transactions cannot accumulate elsewhere; they are always on an individual transaction basis and out of the direct control of the cardholder regarding when they get credited.

(b) The rewards points are usually not automatically credited to the HDFC CC account (unlike SBI cashback); you have to redeem them to convert them into cash (or vouchers or other things) and eventually credit them to the card account. So, somehow, you have control over it.

Btw, SBI following something does not necessitate others to adopt the same thing.

As I repeatedly mention, RBI's BO & their officers are extremely incompetent, evident from their conduct itself, exception is always there. Yes, they don't know their owns sets of rules and regulations, these rules are made by some different departments, most of the times; Department of Regulation, they don't care to brush up on their sets of rules & regulations.

Not only that, they even lack basic diligence & inter personal skills of an ordinary man, IMO.

What you expect?👀

If you're really interested in taking this matter up, then I suggest to proceed with court on merit, but then judicial proceedings will become cumbersome & their interpretation and discretion no one knows, especially taking consideration of time & effort, it's not worth the hassle, but yes if you wish to take initiative, the go ahead.

P.S: Keep aside, whatever HDFC has mentioned, but in practical life, are they considering payment only in next cycle? Seems yes, from the screenshot attached, hence again proved of being at the stone age.

If it's getting credited instantly or by due date, even though it's getting accepted as payment for the next cycle only then it's wrong, otherwise it's very much ok, I don't have relationship with HDFC so don't know how thier redemption works.

If not then just ignore, there are tons of things, where they defeat the provision of laws, most of them don't consider refund/ reversal as the payments and don't adjust TAD & notify cardholder, if received before the due date, there are many instances like that, it's not the matter of a single bank or co., most of them do the same.

It's because of sheer lack of regulatory supervision and penalty & unmeritocratic selection/ appointment of such job title from concerned body; RBI...

(Jolly LLB
Jolly LLM )
vs State

(Petition 171/22/04 )

ICICI bank offers a complementary credit card for college students first year onwards for its Campus power savings account holders. A friend of mine also received one this way. My branch denied the existence of such a scheme (despite being mentioned on the product page) and did not help me with the same. Raised an RBI complaint since I did not receive a satisfactory response from any team. Branch asked me to email, email asked me to contact branch. Twitter asked me to contact branch. PNO and headservicequality email did not respond at all. To the RBI complaint, they responded that I tried to apply for Alumni scheme and there is an age criteria of 23 for the same (it should be 21??). RBI closed my complaint as non maintanable

@Aniket I think your point is why do the rewards redemption get adjusted in the next cycle if they are not considered as bill payment, right?

In my opinion, they are not exactly adjusted in the next cycle they actually get adjusted in the same cycle with change in liability amount. Not as a payment, but as a cash credit, arises due to redemption of points generated in previous billing cycle/ months. So, it reduces the liability of the bill need to be paid in the next cycle.

The words are poorly framed. Nothing else.

Btw, cash credit on a card account cannot be ignored even if they are not considered as direct payment (by, or on behalf of, the card holder), hence has to be adjusted during billing of that billing cycle (period). That is what exactly happening.

Hi, I hope by now you've received clarity on your query through the responses below.

I would just like to point out that before filing a complaint with the RBI, it’s essential to thoroughly read the terms and conditions of the HDFC credit card you’re using. These terms clearly outline how cashback or reward points will be credited or adjusted.

Also, the way cashback or rewards are processed largely depends on the type of credit card. Cashback cards generally have a simpler and faster adjustment mechanism, often within the same billing cycle. However, for cards that offer reward points, the redemption and adjustment process tends to be more complex and time-consuming.

It’s important to note that banks do retain certain discretionary powers when it comes to structuring card features, including reward redemptions and refunds. RBI does provide overarching guidelines, but it does not micro-manage every clause unless there's a serious breach.

Ultimately, each card operates under a unique set of terms and conditions determined by the issuing bank—not RBI—and that includes how refunds (like on returned or cancelled transactions) or rewards are credited. So, not every refund or reward credit will be transferred directly to your bank account or reflected instantly on your card statement.

DISAGREE. None of the rules set by a bank can override RBI guidelines. The rules have to be designed to be within the boundaries defined by RBI.

Last & final: Are yaha jadatar banks ka algorithm designed/programmed hi nahi hain ki refunds, reversals, wagerah ko payments ke rup mein treat karne ka if bill already generate ho gaya hai toh bhaut sarein banks TAD adjust nahi karta na hi notify, even though due date se pehle hi credit kyu na gaya ho (refer other's threads on TF itself for your ready reference) against RBI rules, ussi tarah rewards redemption bill generation ke baad count nahi huwa, next cycle shift, that's all.

Rewards Pts get redeemed and converted/credited as cashback or something else, if any, it's as good as payments.

Lekin nahi, ab yaha excuse/ sahamati dena hai bank ka MITC ke name pe, other similar txn mein wo nahi aata hai uske name pe lol. 🤣

@the fiasco I am of the opinion here that rewards redemption for statement cash is different from what RBI rules says. So banks here are well within their rights to adjust it in next statement because it is not a transaction based entry. It is rewarded for actual transactions and are not part of the transactions itself. Any refund full or partial are part of transaction but not these rewards.

Also, SBI never adjusts in current statement. They take it as a payment and shows it only in next statement. Adustment in current statement means your total due reduced by that much amount at first hand. Suppose you had a Rs.2000 txn with 100 cashback. Still this 100 will be adjusted as payment in next statement else we had due of 1900 irself firsthand. I hope you get my point here.

Same way when I redeem Millennia cashpoints in current statement, they adjust from another due in next statement or if no txn are there which is rare with me, the credit balance stands for those redemptions.

I respect your view, but allow me to clarify the context.

You're absolutely right that no bank rule can override RBI guidelines. However, it's important to understand that the RBI provides a regulatory framework within which banks are allowed to design their card features and operational processes — as long as they don’t violate any core principles set by the RBI.

In this particular case, HDFC Bank has clearly mentioned the cashback adjustment timeline in its MITC, and RBI has reviewed this matter. As per the response received, RBI found that HDFC’s process is in line with the Master Directions issued for Credit Card operations. That means the bank's policy is not overriding RBI guidelines, but rather functioning within them.

So while your point is correct in principle, in practical terms, banks have some flexibility under RBI's framework — and unless there's a clear breach or unfair practice, RBI does not interfere with every individual policy detail.

Thank You all for the responses.

Hear me out once.....

I initially thought the same that most of you have, that cashback is different from refund/ failed or reversed transaction. Yes, that is true. But I differ on the interpretation of the guideline. Here's an eg first, to provide a context.

I have read almost all thread of @SJM on RBI. Idr exactly but in one such complaint ( regd duplicate cibil enquiry) he received less or no compensation. AND that is because RBI said that 30 days time is taken from the day you share your CIBIL REPORT to the BANK.

This behavior of RBI is something I would describe as being PRECISE with the guidelines. And that's how it should be! no doubt

Coming to my Case

1) @2025 You omitted the first word from the guideline. The guideline states ' ANY Credit Amount'.
Also, Nowhere has the term merchant or transaction or Reward Points has been used. AFAI am able to interpret, it can be any credit amount.

2) Reward redemption is the wrong end of the stick. I think we should be focusing on the Cashback.

When one does Reward Redemption in Hdfc, it is posted in the form of CASH to the Credit Card Account. Rewards in their own sense have 0 value (something said by admin of the forum as well) . It is the Cash that is posted, that has value.
And this Cash, is posted as a Direct Credit.
Thereby, ideally making it a part of guideline as it states 'Any Credit amount'

3) Similar transactions here depicts a similar scenario OTHER than refund/ failed/ reversed scenarios. That is because these 3 scenarios are not conclusive in nature and to summarize or bring in other scenarios the word similar has been used.

If similar means the same as refund/ reversed/ failed why even include the word then. The Guideline could have simply been 'Any credit amount arising out of refund/ reversed/ failed transaction for which the payme........... '

If RBI is so precise in sjmajumdar's case, that the DATE the report is shared is taken into consideration, they should have been precise in interpreting this guideline as well.


Forget the Reward points. The way the Guideline is mentioned - > It deals with ANY Credit Amount that is posted cause of failed/ refund/ reversed or even other similar scenarios. And here, the Credit Amount maybe because of Reward Points, but essentially it is a Credit Amount. And hence, it should come within the boundaries defined by the RBI for what needs to be done when there is -> ANY Credit amount arising out of........

Here's another eg
Idfc First Bank charges Joining Fee for their Metal Cards by intimating the customer in advance. Whereas, the guidelines clearly state that the joining fee can only be charged after Card Activation.

If EVERY Bank can just add a CLAUSE in their MITC to Mitigate and avoid the Guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India, which is the Regulatory Body for ALL Banks, then what is even the USE of RBI Guidelines ?

Notification:

All respected member(TF) of Bar Council.
Please pay attention;

A Special review petition is currently going on. It will be a Landmark.

 

[qf037x42v]

HDFC is one of the scummiest banks in India but in this case, they're not wrong. What you're pointing is just a technicality.

 

[the fiasco]

HDFC is one of the scummiest banks in India but in this case, they're not wrong. What you're pointing is just a technicality.

(I am pointing precision and interpretation of guidelines), AND isn't that what really matters?

RBI is precise enough to state - 30 days is considered from the DAY you share your Cibil report with the Bank.

Coming to interpretation example - Banks cannot charge for joining fees before activation of Card.
But Banks are doing it. By adding a clause in their OWN T&C.

So, technicality wise Idfc has PROPERLY informed you that the Joining Fees will be charged. And they inform you at the time of Cc Application itself. Technicality wise the Bank is 100% correct.

So, now that means they can just go ahead and charge?? Really? Go above what is defined by the Regulatory Body and do what they want?

Then what are the guidelines really for??

 

[SJM]

I respect your view, but allow me to clarify the context.

You're absolutely right that no bank rule can override RBI guidelines. However, it's important to understand that the RBI provides a regulatory framework within which banks are allowed to design their card features and operational processes — as long as they don’t violate any core principles set by the RBI.

In this particular case, HDFC Bank has clearly mentioned the cashback adjustment timeline in its MITC, and RBI has reviewed this matter. As per the response received, RBI found that HDFC’s process is in line with the Master Directions issued for Credit Card operations. That means the bank's policy is not overriding RBI guidelines, but rather functioning within them.

So while your point is correct in principle, in practical terms, banks have some flexibility under RBI's framework — and unless there's a clear breach or unfair practice, RBI does not interfere with every individual policy detail.

I did not say anything about the current case. I already shared my view that HDFC is within their rights to adjust cashback in the next billing cycle. I only had objection to your statement "Ultimately, each card operates under a unique set of terms and conditions determined by the issuing bank—not RBI". Point being the unique set of T&C by the issuing bank must follow RBI guidelines. For example, in this case, if RBI would have mentioned that cashback needs to be adjusted in the same billing cycle - HDFC would be forced to do it. I hope you get it now.

 

[SJM]

(I am pointing precision and interpretation of guidelines), AND isn't that what really matters?

RBI is precise enough to state - 30 days is considered from the DAY you share your Cibil report with the Bank.

Coming to interpretation example - Banks cannot charge for joining fees before activation of Card.
But Banks are doing it. By adding a clause in their OWN T&C.

So, technicality wise Idfc has PROPERLY informed you that the Joining Fees will be charged. And they inform you at the time of Cc Application itself. Technicality wise the Bank is 100% correct.

So, now that means they can just go ahead and charge?? Really? Go above what is defined by the Regulatory Body and do what they want?

Then what are the guidelines really for??

This calls for a bigger case. Complaint to RBI that IDFC is violating RBI guidelines.

 

[the fiasco]

This calls for a bigger case. Complaint to RBI that IDFC is violating RBI guidelines.

Apologies for the Topic Diversion

I gave him that example purely as a reference to the Current thread - as to how the RBI seemingly cannot interpret its own guidelines.

If RBI is so precise in sjmajumdar's case, that the DATE the report is shared is taken into consideration, they should have been precise in interpreting this guideline as well.

 

[SJM]

Thank You all for the responses.

Hear me out once.....

I initially thought the same that most of you have, that cashback is different from refund/ failed or reversed transaction. Yes, that is true. But I differ on the interpretation of the guideline. Here's an eg first, to provide a context.

I have read almost all thread of @SJM on RBI. Idr exactly but in one such complaint ( regd duplicate cibil enquiry) he received less or no compensation. AND that is because RBI said that 30 days time is taken from the day you share your CIBIL REPORT to the BANK.

This behavior of RBI is something I would describe as being PRECISE with the guidelines. And that's how it should be! no doubt

Coming to my Case

1) @2025 You omitted the first word from the guideline. The guideline states ' ANY Credit Amount'.
Also, Nowhere has the term merchant or transaction or Reward Points has been used. AFAI am able to interpret, it can be any credit amount.

2) Reward redemption is the wrong end of the stick. I think we should be focusing on the Cashback.

When one does Reward Redemption in Hdfc, it is posted in the form of CASH to the Credit Card Account. Rewards in their own sense have 0 value (something said by admin of the forum as well) . It is the Cash that is posted, that has value.
And this Cash, is posted as a Direct Credit.
Thereby, ideally making it a part of guideline as it states 'Any Credit amount'

3) Similar transactions here depicts a similar scenario OTHER than refund/ failed/ reversed scenarios. That is because these 3 scenarios are not conclusive in nature and to summarize or bring in other scenarios the word similar has been used.

If similar means the same as refund/ reversed/ failed why even include the word then. The Guideline could have simply been 'Any credit amount arising out of refund/ reversed/ failed transaction for which the payme........... '

If RBI is so precise in sjmajumdar's case, that the DATE the report is shared is taken into consideration, they should have been precise in interpreting this guideline as well.


Forget the Reward points. The way the Guideline is mentioned - > It deals with ANY Credit Amount that is posted cause of failed/ refund/ reversed or even other similar scenarios. And here, the Credit Amount maybe because of Reward Points, but essentially it is a Credit Amount. And hence, it should come within the boundaries defined by the RBI for what needs to be done when there is -> ANY Credit amount arising out of........

Here's another eg
Idfc First Bank charges Joining Fee for their Metal Cards by intimating the customer in advance. Whereas, the guidelines clearly state that the joining fee can only be charged after Card Activation.

If EVERY Bank can just add a CLAUSE in their MITC to Mitigate and avoid the Guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India, which is the Regulatory Body for ALL Banks, then what is even the USE of RBI Guidelines ?

You have a point but unfortunately it may not work with RBIO as you don't get a hearing in most cases. To fight this out you will probably need to go to consumer court.

Also, do you mean to say the cashback is posted in the CC account but not adjusted with the outstanding even when the cashback is posted before the due date?

 

[the fiasco]

Also, do you mean to say the cashback is posted in the CC account but not adjusted with the outstanding even when the cashback is posted before the due date?

Yes, exactly! You got my point correctly.

When the points are redeemed, the Amount is posted as a 'Credit Amount' to the Hdfc Card Account. Even if the amt is posted before due billing date, it is not adjusted against the current billing cycle. ( Also note - The redemption charges of ₹99 + gst are immediately deducted) but overall adjustment is not before the due date. It is in the next Cycle Only.

( some cards like Swiggy maybe an exception, where the Credit amt [cashback] is adjusted in the same cycle)

as you don't get a hearing in most cases. To fight this out you will probably need to go to consumer court.

True!! While I don't have the time to go to Consumer Court, I decided that I can at least share my experience on this Forum.

You have a point

glad even you understood what I had to say
&
Hence the title of the Thread - Rbi Seemingly cannot interpret its own guidelines.

 

[2025]

Thank You all for the responses.

Hear me out once.....

I initially thought the same that most of you have, that cashback is different from refund/ failed or reversed transaction. Yes, that is true. But I differ on the interpretation of the guideline. Here's an eg first, to provide a context.

I have read almost all thread of @SJM on RBI. Idr exactly but in one such complaint ( regd duplicate cibil enquiry) he received less or no compensation. AND that is because RBI said that 30 days time is taken from the day you share your CIBIL REPORT to the BANK.

This behavior of RBI is something I would describe as being PRECISE with the guidelines. And that's how it should be! no doubt

Coming to my Case

1) @2025 You omitted the first word from the guideline. The guideline states ' ANY Credit Amount'.
Also, Nowhere has the term merchant or transaction or Reward Points has been used. AFAI am able to interpret, it can be any credit amount.

2) Reward redemption is the wrong end of the stick. I think we should be focusing on the Cashback.

When one does Reward Redemption in Hdfc, it is posted in the form of CASH to the Credit Card Account. Rewards in their own sense have 0 value (something said by admin of the forum as well) . It is the Cash that is posted, that has value.
And this Cash, is posted as a Direct Credit.
Thereby, ideally making it a part of guideline as it states 'Any Credit amount'

3) Similar transactions here depicts a similar scenario OTHER than refund/ failed/ reversed scenarios. That is because these 3 scenarios are not conclusive in nature and to summarize or bring in other scenarios the word similar has been used.

If similar means the same as refund/ reversed/ failed why even include the word then. The Guideline could have simply been 'Any credit amount arising out of refund/ reversed/ failed transaction for which the payme........... '

If RBI is so precise in sjmajumdar's case, that the DATE the report is shared is taken into consideration, they should have been precise in interpreting this guideline as well.


Forget the Reward points. The way the Guideline is mentioned - > It deals with ANY Credit Amount that is posted cause of failed/ refund/ reversed or even other similar scenarios. And here, the Credit Amount maybe because of Reward Points, but essentially it is a Credit Amount. And hence, it should come within the boundaries defined by the RBI for what needs to be done when there is -> ANY Credit amount arising out of........

Here's another eg
Idfc First Bank charges Joining Fee for their Metal Cards by intimating the customer in advance. Whereas, the guidelines clearly state that the joining fee can only be charged after Card Activation.

If EVERY Bank can just add a CLAUSE in their MITC to Mitigate and avoid the Guidelines set by the Reserve Bank of India, which is the Regulatory Body for ALL Banks, then what is even the USE of RBI Guidelines ?

Yes, exactly! You got my point correctly.

When the points are redeemed, the Amount is posted as a 'Credit Amount' to the Hdfc Card Account. Even if the amt is posted before due date, it is not adjusted against the current billing cycle. ( Also note - The redemption charges of ₹99 + gst are immediately deducted) but overall adjustment is not before the due date. It is in the next Cycle Only.

( some cards like Swiggy maybe an exception, where the Credit amt [cashback] is adjusted in the same cycle)

True!! While I don't have the time to go to Consumer Court, I decided that I can at least share my experience on this Forum.

glad even you understood what I had to say
&
Hence the title of the Thread - Rbi Seemingly cannot interpret its own guidelines.

I have already clarified that point in the comment quoted below. I still stand by my primary observation that they are not similar.

@Aniket I think your point is why the rewards redemption gets adjusted in the next cycle if they are not considered bill payments.

In my opinion, they are not exactly adjusted in the next cycle; they actually get adjusted in the same cycle with a change in liability amount. This occurs not as a payment but as a cash credit due to the redemption of points generated in the previous billing cycle/ months. So, it reduces the liability of the bill that needs to be paid in the next cycle.

The words are poorly framed. Nothing else.

By the way, cash credits on a card account cannot be ignored even if they are not considered direct payment (by, or on behalf of, the cardholder). Hence, they have to be adjusted during the billing cycle (period). That is exactly what is happening.

CC @Aniket @SJM @hender @desiviru @Dr.Anand456 @qf037x42v
You need to conceptualize two more things to understand my perspectives on the RBI master circular effectively.

(1) Any (all) credit(s) in a particular billing cycle is not necessarily a payment of the due. This is especially true if it is given as a reward (or conversion of rewards) from a credit card that has a billing cycle (free periods) involved, and you have direct control/involvement over its redemption. There is a fine difference between auto-credit/redemption and controlled credit/redemption.

(2) Reversal/refund, etc., is not payment either, but they are actually correcting the previous (mis)calculation of liability (the bill was generated based on the assumption that they won't be cancelled/ refunded. If you are getting a refund due to cancellation of a purchase made after the bill was generated, and that is being marked as bill paid (as currently being done by IDFC, it's a secret), then that's a loophole on the bank's end. RBI has not said that anyway.

If anyone has an AU Lit credit card in your circle, then that might help you understand it precisely. @drsel @plastikman

Also, this is my perspective and my way of interpretation, just like you have yours.
I have tried my best. If you are still unsure about my points, please re-read them once, particularly the bold statements. I won't get any incentives supporting HDFC or RBI Ombudsman officers. I am neither related to them nor have I ever raised any complaints to the RBI Ombudsman.

Thanks.

 

[hender]

Lord Ship will be happy 😊 seeing the argument and counter argument.

 

[SJM]

(1) Any credit in a particular billing cycle is not a payment of the due.

(2) Reversal/refund, etc., is not payment either, but they are actually correcting the previous (mis)calculation of liability

Where did you get these 2 points from? Can you share RBI circular link and section number?

 

[the fiasco]

If you are getting a refund due to cancellation of a purchase made after the bill was generated, and that is being marked as bill paid (as currently being done by IDFC, it's a secret), then that's a loophole on the bank's end. RBI has not said that anyway.

It's not a loophole but rather a guideline. Rbi has indeed said so. It's nice to see that Idfc is following that guideline.

Explained in FAQ's by the RBI as well

 

[kiwi195]

@SJM RBI closed another ombudsman complaint of mine with false information from HDFC. They generated an application number against a pre approved offer and then declined it saying there was no offer at the time of KYC. 🙂

 

[Aniket]

It's not a loophole but rather a guideline. Rbi has indeed said so. It's nice to see that Idfc is following that guideline.

Explained in FAQ's by the RBI as well

View attachment 95438

2025 said: If you are getting a refund due to cancellation of a purchase made after the bill was generated, and that is being marked as bill paid

Lol 🤣 issi liye keh raha... re-read

He meant to that if refund gets credited which belongs to current billing cycle only, not last/previous one, though it's getting treated and adjusted for the last bill due.

Suppose the purchase is made after Oct 30, 2023, let say, on Nov 1, 2023 and the refund is received for the same, then TAD also gets adjusted. 🤣

That's all the game of algorithm/programming.

It doesn't happen only with IDFC but with some others as well. Not only that, even though TAD seems adjusted on credit relating to EMI, charges is getting applied by some banks.

Last bola tha firse karwaya diya, ignore hi dabana padega ab... interpretation - interpretation chal raha kuch bhi just because MITC mein kuch bhi mention hai and BO ka reply bank ke favour mein aagya without thoughtful reasoning, which is not strange at all.

 

[2025]

Where did you get these 2 points from? Can you share RBI circular link and section number?

My own interpretation sir based on what the OP has posted in his first post. I have not read that circular ever. If RBI has said otherwise, then that should get revised in near future. Again, my opinion.
I have further refined the used words in point-1 to remove ambiguity, that require an explanation.

Btw, as OP has quoted same explanation with example, and he wrote it was given by RBI in their FAQ. Please check that as well.

It's not a loophole but rather a guideline. Rbi has indeed said so. It's nice to see that Idfc is following that guideline.

Explained in FAQ's by the RBI as well

View attachment 95438

That is exactly matching with what I said in my previous post even without checking their circular and explanation.

I find the explanation as quoted by you is as per my interpretation. Nothing wrong in that explanation as well.

At the same time I find your interpretation (about IDFC example), again, is not aligned with RBI explanation.

 

[the fiasco]

Lol 🤣 issi liye keh raha... re-read

my bad. misread it

I read it as - > If you are getting a refund due to cancellation of a purchase made,(comma) after the bill was generated, and that is being marked as bill paid (as currently being done by IDFC, it's a secret), then that's a loophole on the bank's end. RBI has not said that anyway.

 

[2025]

Lol 🤣 issi liye keh raha... re-read

Exactly you read my mind.
I wanted to write that again but later refrain doing so.