What 1,247 BRSR filers actually disclosed, and what they did not.
Every figure below is a company disclosure, drawn from SEBI BRSR and XBRL filings. Published 20 August 2026. Next edition November 2026.
Indian listed companies have largely solved Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosure: 86.8% report both. Scope 3 is reported by 42.1%. Depth is where the picture breaks: only 19 companies in the entire index, 1.5%, break Scope 3 into the GHG Protocol categories an assurer or an EU buyer can actually test. Reasonable assurance on BRSR Core is confirmed for 24.2%. Sixteen companies out of 1,247, or 1.3%, score above 65 on a 100-point disclosure rubric. The gap in Indian carbon disclosure is not the headline number. It is everything underneath it.
The comparable universe: companies whose disclosure can be read rather than guessed at.
| Filing year | Companies |
|---|---|
| FY 2024-25 | 1,123 |
| FY 2025-26 | 98 |
| CY 2025 | 13 |
| FY 2023-24 | 9 |
| CY 2024 | 3 |
Between them, these companies disclosed 1.29 billion tCO2e of Scope 1 emissions and 101.7 million tCO2e of Scope 2. The ten largest Scope 1 emitters account for 61.7% of the disclosed Scope 1 total, led by NTPC at 327.0 million tCO2e, Adani Power at 90.1 million and UltraTech Cement at 81.1 million.
A note on adding these figures up: one company's Scope 1 is frequently another's Scope 2, most obviously for power generators. The totals above are sums of disclosed figures, not a national inventory, and should not be compared against India's national emissions.
1,083 companies, 86.8%, disclose both Scope 1 and Scope 2.
This is the clearest good-news finding in the dataset, and it is worth stating plainly because it is easy to be cynical about disclosure mandates. BRSR asked for these two numbers, and the market delivered them at scale. Where a company is missing, it is usually a smaller entity in an early filing year rather than a deliberate omission.
What gets specified gets reported. Which is exactly why the next section looks the way it does.
Scope 3 is where most Indian listed companies keep the majority of their carbon footprint. It is the number an EU buyer asks for under CBAM, the number a lender needs under PCAF, and the number that decides whether an SBTi target is credible.
525 companies, 42.1%, disclose a Scope 3 figure. 722 companies, 57.9%, do not.
| Scope 3 status | Companies | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Disclosed by the company | 525 | 42.1% |
| Not disclosed, Climes estimate on file | 357 | 28.6% |
| Not disclosed, no figure available | 364 | 29.2% |
| Provenance unresolved | 1 | 0.1% |
Scope 3 disclosure runs roughly half the rate of Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosure. The difference between the two is instructive: BRSR specifies Scope 1 and Scope 2 tightly and 86.8% of the market complies, while Scope 3 is asked for far more loosely and fewer than half comply.
Every figure in the Disclosed row is the company's own number. The Climes estimate row exists because we modelled Scope 3 for part of the universe in August 2026 using sector intensity ratios. Those estimates appear nowhere in this report's findings and are shown here only so the universe adds up.
This distinction nearly did not survive fact-checking, and the method is worth publishing because it bears on how much weight the 42.1% can carry.
Our database field marking a Scope 3 figure as disclosed or estimated was left mid-reclassification by an incomplete extraction job on 6 August 2026, and 555 rows defaulted to "estimated" regardless of origin. Taking that field at face value would have understated Scope 3 disclosure at 26.3%.
The two populations turn out to be cleanly separable. Our August modelling multiplied disclosed Scope 1 by a fixed sector ratio, so modelled rows sit on exact constants. 357 of the 555 are precisely Scope 1 multiplied by 1.5, 1.2, 0.8, 0.15, 3.5 or a small number of other constants, rounded to the whole tonne. A further 197 are not products of any constant: 196 of them carry 196 distinct arbitrary ratios, 112 of which exceed 3.5, above the entire range the model could produce, and the last discloses zero Scope 1 so no ratio is computable. Those 197 are extracted disclosures. Adding them to the 328 already confirmed gives 525.
A Scope 3 total on its own is a number without a structure. The GHG Protocol defines fifteen categories, and it is the breakdown that makes a figure testable.
An assurer traces category 1 to procurement records, category 11 to product sales and use assumptions, category 4 to freight invoices. A single aggregate figure cannot be audited, only accepted.
Nineteen companies out of 1,247, or 1.5%, disclose Scope 3 broken into GHG Protocol categories. Ten of them disclose ten or more categories. One discloses all fifteen.
| Categories disclosed | Companies |
|---|---|
| 15 | Adani Energy Solutions |
| 14 | Balkrishna Industries |
| 12 | Infosys, Wipro |
| 11 | Anupam Rasayan India, PCBL Chemical |
| 10 | Apollo Tyres, Balrampur Chini Mills, Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, HCL Technologies |
| 8 | Cipla, Hindustan Unilever, Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Consultancy Services, UltraTech Cement |
| 7 | Tech Mahindra |
| 5 | HDFC Bank |
| 3 | Akzo Nobel India |
| 1 | AU Small Finance Bank |
That is the complete list. Nineteen companies out of 1,247.
Category-level Scope 3 is not a widespread practice with laggards trailing behind it. It is a practice that nineteen Indian listed companies have and 1,228 do not. Put next to the 525 companies that disclose a Scope 3 total, it means that for roughly 96% of the companies that do report Scope 3, the figure arrives as a single number with no visible structure underneath it.
Reasonable assurance on the nine BRSR Core attributes reaches the top 1,000 listed entities in FY 2026-27.
| Assurance status in filings reviewed | Companies | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reasonable assurance confirmed | 302 | 24.2% |
| Limited assurance | 52 | 4.2% |
| No assurance stated | 12 | 1.0% |
| Could not be determined | 880 | 70.6% |
| Not applicable / no filing | 1 | 0.1% |
The honest reading: 302 companies are confirmed to carry reasonable assurance today. For 880 companies the assurance status could not be established from the filings held in the database, which is a limitation of our source coverage and not evidence that those companies lack assurance.
Confirmed reasonable assurance is currently the exception, and a large majority of filers will need to demonstrate it within the current financial year.
| SBTi status | Companies | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Validated targets | 78 | 6.3% |
| Committed | 41 | 3.3% |
| No SBTi engagement recorded | 1,128 | 90.5% |
CDP. 1,220 of 1,247 companies carry an unknown CDP status in our data. Thirteen have a recorded score and three more are recorded as having responded without a score on file. This reflects our source coverage, not company behaviour, so no CDP participation rate is published.
Net-zero target years. This field was populated in part by Climes modelling in August 2026, and the modelled entries cannot now be separated from genuine ones. 480 of the 515 target years on file are exactly 2050, which is the signature of that modelling rather than of the market. No net-zero adoption rate is published.
Scored out of 100 on Carbon X-Ray Rubric 2.0: Disclosure and Compliance (50), Emissions and Scope 3 (30), Claims Defensibility (20).
| Band | Score | Companies | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leader | 85 and above | 5 | 0.4% |
| Strong | 65 to 84 | 11 | 0.9% |
| Mid-pack | 45 to 64 | 349 | 28.0% |
| Lagging | 25 to 44 | 881 | 70.6% |
| Under review | data anomaly | 1 | 0.1% |
| Rank | Company | Score |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Infosys | 97 |
| 2 | Wipro | 87 |
| 3 | Apollo Tyres | 85 |
| 3 | HCL Technologies | 85 |
| 3 | Dr. Reddy's Laboratories | 85 |
All five carry reasonable assurance, validated SBTi targets and a CDP score of A or A minus. The pattern is consistent: companies do not get to the top of this table by disclosing one thing well. They get there by closing every gap at once.
The composition of the top of the table is itself a finding. Five of the seven highest-scoring companies are IT services businesses, whose direct emissions are among the smallest in the index. The companies with the largest physical footprints, and therefore the most at stake under CBAM and CCTS, are not the ones with the best disclosure.
The eleven largest classified sectors, covering 474 companies. A further 587 companies sit in a diversified or unclassified bucket, so sector figures are indicative.
| Sector | Companies | Avg score | Scope 3 disclosed | Reasonable assurance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steel & Metals | 24 | 44.1 | 54.2% | 33.3% |
| Power & Utilities | 41 | 41.3 | 51.2% | 26.8% |
| IT Services | 59 | 39.2 | 50.8% | 16.9% |
| Automobiles & Auto Components | 20 | 40.4 | 50.0% | 10.0% |
| Real Estate & REITs | 24 | 42.5 | 45.8% | 25.0% |
| Pharma & Healthcare | 54 | 39.7 | 42.6% | 16.7% |
| Banking & Financial Services | 101 | 40.8 | 42.6% | 36.6% |
| FMCG & Consumer Goods | 35 | 42.5 | 37.1% | 31.4% |
| Chemicals & Fertilisers | 53 | 40.8 | 35.8% | 9.4% |
| Capital Goods & Engineering | 37 | 39.4 | 27.0% | 10.8% |
| Textiles & Apparel | 26 | 38.4 | 15.4% | 15.4% |
Less than a third of the rate in steel and metals. Textiles is among the sectors most exposed to European buyer requirements and supply chain due diligence rules, and it is the least equipped to answer them.
The lowest confirmed assurance rate in the index, in a sector where product-level carbon data is increasingly requested in export contracts.
Scope 3 disclosed at 50.0%, assurance confirmed at only 10.0%. For a sector whose Scope 3 is dominated by category 11 use-phase emissions, that is the number most likely to be challenged.
The heavy-industry sectors sit at the top of this table because CBAM and CCTS have already made the question expensive for them. Read alongside the scores above, where the highest individual results belong to IT services companies, the pattern is that regulatory exposure has driven disclosure breadth in India but has not yet driven disclosure quality.
The Scope 1 and 2 job is done and the Scope 3 depth job has barely started. Reasonable assurance reaches the top 1,000 entities in FY 2026-27, and an assurer will ask for the source document behind each figure. A Scope 3 total with no category structure and no evidence trail turns every assurance cycle into a rebuild rather than a review.
CBAM's definitive regime went live on 1 January 2026, certificate sales open on 1 February 2027, and the first declaration covering 2026 imports is due on 30 September 2027. Your EU importer needs product-level embedded emissions, not an entity-level total. Nineteen Indian listed companies currently disclose Scope 3 at a granularity anywhere near that requirement.
Financed emissions under PCAF are built from your counterparties' numbers. With Scope 3 disclosure at 42.1%, confirmed assurance at 24.2% and category-level Scope 3 at 1.5%, most of an Indian loan book's carbon profile currently rests on figures that are either absent or have not been independently tested.
The BRSR mandate demonstrably worked for the two numbers it specified precisely. The gap has opened exactly where the requirement is least specific. That is an argument for specifying Scope 3 category disclosure, not for adding new frameworks.
525 of 1,247 BRSR filers, or 42.1%, disclose a Scope 3 figure. The remaining 57.9% do not. Scope 3 disclosure runs at roughly half the rate of Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosure, which stands at 86.8%.
Nineteen, or 1.5% of the index. Ten of them disclose ten or more of the fifteen categories, and one discloses all fifteen. For roughly 96% of the companies that report a Scope 3 total, the figure arrives as a single number with no category structure underneath it.
302 companies, 24.2% of the universe, are confirmed to carry reasonable assurance. Assurance status could not be determined for 880 companies from the filings reviewed, so 24.2% is a floor rather than a market rate. Reasonable assurance reaches the top 1,000 listed entities in FY 2026-27.
On Carbon X-Ray Rubric 2.0, the five Leaders scoring 85 or above are Infosys (97), Wipro (87), Apollo Tyres (85), HCL Technologies (85) and Dr. Reddy's Laboratories (85). Only sixteen companies out of 1,247 score above 65, and 70.6% sit in the Lagging band.
Textiles and apparel, which discloses Scope 3 at 15.4%, less than a third of the rate in steel and metals at 54.2%. Chemicals and fertilisers has the lowest confirmed assurance rate at 9.4%.
The 1,247 companies in this index disclosed 1.29 billion tCO2e of Scope 1 and 101.7 million tCO2e of Scope 2. These are sums of disclosed figures and involve double counting between power generators and their customers, so they are not a national inventory. No Scope 3 total is published in this edition.
Yes. Quote and cite freely with attribution to Climes, The State of Carbon Disclosure in India 2026. If a figure attributed to your company is wrong, write to growth@climes.io with the filing reference and we will correct it and note the correction in the next edition.
Universe. 1,247 Indian listed entities with at least one BRSR on file. Non-filers are excluded so that every company in the index can be assessed on the same basis.
Sources. SEBI BRSR and XBRL filings, BRSR Core assurance statements, the SBTi target dashboard and the CDP registry. Financial data from Financial Modeling Prep. Scoring by Carbon X-Ray Rubric 2.0, published June 2026.
Disclosed versus modelled. Every finding in this edition rests on company disclosure. No Climes-modelled emissions figure is published as a finding anywhere in this report. Where modelled data exists in our database it is identified and excluded, by the method set out in section 3.
Limitations, stated openly:
Next edition. November 2026, covering FY 2025-26 filings as they land, with restored provenance on net-zero targets, expanded assurance coverage, verified Scope 3 magnitudes, and the first year-on-year movement figures.