Content authored by practitioners with experience at Amazon India, Intuit QuickBooks, and the Tata Group. Meet the team →
A finance analyst books a USD 10,000 export invoice on 12 August 2026 at the spot rate of Rs 83.50 into the ERP — the invoice line reads Rs 8,35,000. Three weeks later the foreign buyer remits USD 10,000 and the AD Category-I bank credits Rs 8,38,000 into the current account after applying its TT-buying rate. The ERP posts the receipt on 5 September 2026 at the day's Rs 84.20 spot rate — the receipt line reads Rs 8,42,000. At 31 March 2027, if the receivable were still open (say a delayed second tranche), the closing-rate restatement would post it at Rs 8,47,000 against a Rs 84.70 closing rate. Four INR figures for the same USD 10,000 exposure. The analyst wants an explanation for the CFO before the monthly close signs off; the auditor will want the same explanation before the year-end trial balance is locked. The question is not which figure is wrong — none of them is — but which bucket each of the differences belongs in and which one carries a downstream FEMA or Ind AS 21 consequence.
Every difference between an ERP forex invoice line and any other INR figure for the same underlying foreign currency amount falls into one of four buckets. Bucket 1 — rate movement between the invoice date spot rate and the settlement date spot rate, a real forex gain or loss on a monetary item under Ind AS 21 paragraph 28, flowing to the P&L on the Foreign Exchange Gain / (Loss) line in the period the settlement occurs. Bucket 2 — AD bank margin between the interbank / FBIL reference rate and the bank's card rate (TT-buying or TT-selling), typically 15 to 50 paise per USD as bank margin plus a further 10 to 25 paise TT-buying versus TT-selling spread. This is a bank charge that classifies to finance cost, not forex. Bucket 3 — year-end closing-rate restatement of monetary items still open at the reporting date, a book-only entry that reverses on subsequent settlement so the net across two periods ties to the original-to-final rate movement. Bucket 4 — capital-asset carve-out under Section 43A of the Income-tax Act, where forex differences on the acquisition liability for an imported capital asset or an ECB loan specifically obtained for the asset are added to or deducted from the actual cost of the asset rather than flowing to the P&L. Bucket 4 is a book-versus-tax reconciling difference — the P&L on the book side and the depreciation base on the tax side move differently. Layered on top of the four buckets are two treasury-side surfaces — hedge accounting under Ind AS 109 that resets the effective rate on a hedged exposure to the hedge rate, and invoice-currency versus settlement-currency conversion where an intermediate cross-rate at the bank adds a second spread.
A four-bucket reconciliation working paper with columns for the invoice booking rate, the FBIL reference rate on the settlement date, the AD bank's TT-buying or TT-selling rate on the settlement date, and the closing rate at the reporting date. A supporting workbook that ties each foreign-currency invoice to its underlying bank contract note (the AD bank's Form A1 or A2 acknowledgement for imports, the FIRC/FIRA acknowledgement for exports). A monthly restatement schedule for open foreign-currency monetary items — trade receivables, trade payables, foreign-currency loans, EEFC balances, foreign-currency cash — that runs on the last working day of the month against the RBI/FBIL reference rate. A separate register for capital-asset forex adjustments under Section 43A that feeds the depreciation working. A FEMA realisation tracker with the nine-month clock reverse-calculated from the date of shipment for every open export receivable, with an eighth-month controller escalation and a bank-side reporting flag. An LEI monitoring flag on every counterparty whose aggregated USD or equivalent cross-border exposure over the financial year is trending toward the USD 50 million threshold.
Every forex invoice on the ERP reconciles to a bank credit or debit with a bucket-wise decomposition — rate movement to the forex P&L line, bank margin to finance cost, closing-rate restatement to the reversing schedule, capital-asset piece to the Section 43A depreciation base. Open monetary items at each reporting date are restated to the closing rate with a matching reversal in the subsequent period. Every open export receivable carries a FEMA nine-month countdown with a live escalation ladder — analyst reminder at month six, controller escalation at month eight, AD bank realisation-extension request at month nine or a caution-list report against the exporter. Every counterparty above USD 50 million aggregated cross-border exposure has an LEI on file before the transaction that would breach the threshold. The forex line in the P&L is defensible against an Ind AS 21 audit sample; the tax computation reconciles the Section 43A book-versus-tax difference; and the CFO signs off the forex working paper on Day 12 of the monthly close rather than debating four rupee figures for the same USD invoice on Day 20.
You booked a USD 10,000 invoice last month. The ERP line reads Rs 8,35,000 against a Rs 83.50 spot rate on the invoice date. The buyer remitted the money three weeks later; the bank credited Rs 8,38,000 into your current account. When the ERP posted the receipt at the day’s rate of Rs 84.20, the receipt line landed at Rs 8,42,000. If the receivable were still open at year-end, the closing-rate restatement would push it to Rs 8,47,000.
Four INR figures for the same USD 10,000 dollar amount. None of them is a data-entry error. The CFO wants an explanation before the monthly close is signed off, and the auditor will want the same explanation before the year-end trial balance is locked. Which figure is correct — and if all four are correct, where does the difference go?
The quick answer
Every difference between INR figures for the same foreign currency amount falls into one of four Ind AS 21 buckets. Bucket 1 is rate movement between invoice date and settlement date — this is a real forex gain or loss on a monetary item and flows to the P&L Foreign Exchange Gain / (Loss) line in the settlement period. Bucket 2 is the AD Category-I bank’s margin over the FBIL reference rate (typically 15 to 50 paise per USD plus a further TT-buying versus TT-selling spread) — this is a bank charge, classified to finance cost, not forex. Bucket 3 is the year-end closing-rate restatement of monetary items still open at the reporting date — a book-only entry that reverses in the subsequent period. Bucket 4 is the Section 43A Income-tax Act carve-out for capital-asset imports and ECB loans specifically obtained for the asset, where the forex adjustment goes to the cost of the asset instead of the P&L.
The four buckets have different owners, different reconciliation surfaces, and different downstream consequences. Only one of them — the FEMA nine-month realisation clock on export receivables — is an escalation. The other three are routine reconciliation.
Bucket 1 — the spot rate moved between invoice date and settlement date
Under Ind AS 21 paragraph 28, a foreign-currency monetary item (a receivable, a payable, a foreign-currency loan) is initially recognised at the spot rate on the transaction date. When the item is settled, any difference between the settlement-date rate and the original booking rate is recognised in profit or loss as a forex gain or loss.
Illustrative arithmetic on our USD 10,000 export invoice — booked at Rs 83.50 on 12 August 2026 (Rs 8,35,000 in the books), settled at the day’s spot of Rs 84.20 on 5 September 2026 (the ERP receipt line reads Rs 8,42,000). The Rs 7,000 difference is a real forex gain to the P&L for FY 2026-27 because the rupee weakened against the dollar between the two dates and an exporter benefits from that movement. The mirror case — a foreign-currency payable that has to be settled at a higher rate than it was booked — is a forex loss under the same rule.
Non-monetary items behave differently. An advance paid in USD for a service yet to be received is a non-monetary item and sits at the historical rate until the service is consumed. A prepaid rent in a foreign currency, an equity investment carried at historical cost — none of these restate.
Bucket 2 — the AD bank’s rate versus the FBIL reference rate
The rupee-per-dollar figure quoted in the newspaper (or on the FBIL website, or in an RBI daily publication) is the reference rate — an interbank spot rate polled at a fixed time each business day. The AD Category-I bank does not convert your remittance at the reference rate. It converts at its own card rate, which sits below the reference rate on TT-buying (bank buys foreign currency from you) and above the reference rate on TT-selling (bank sells foreign currency to you).
The margin is typically 15 to 50 paise per USD on either side of the reference rate, plus a further 10 to 25 paise between the TT-buying and TT-selling quotes. On a USD 10,000 remittance, that is Rs 1,500 to Rs 5,000 the bank keeps as spread. Illustrative — the FBIL reference rate on 5 September 2026 is Rs 84.35, but the AD bank credits your account at the TT-buying rate of Rs 83.80 (55 paise below). The ERP correctly posts the receipt at Rs 8,38,000; the difference against the reference rate of Rs 5,500 is bank margin, classified to finance cost or bank charges on the P&L — not to forex.
The reconciliation working paper has to separate the two. A three-column workbook — invoice booking rate, FBIL reference rate on settlement date, AD bank’s actual conversion rate — makes the bucket 1 rate movement legible against the bucket 2 bank margin. Without that split, the entire gap ends up on the forex line, which understates finance cost, misstates forex gain or loss, and confuses the trend analysis at the year-end board pack.
Bucket 3 — the year-end closing rate restatement
Every foreign-currency monetary item still open at the reporting date is restated to the closing rate under Ind AS 21. If the USD 10,000 receivable had not been collected by 31 March 2027 and the closing rate was Rs 84.70, the receivable would carry at Rs 8,47,000 and a Rs 12,000 forex gain would go to the FY 2026-27 P&L. When the receivable is eventually collected in FY 2027-28 at, say, Rs 84.30, a Rs 4,000 forex loss goes to FY 2027-28. The net across the two years is Rs 8,000 gain — which ties exactly to the difference between the original booking rate (Rs 83.50) and the eventual settlement rate (Rs 84.30).
The bucket 3 entry is book-only and reverses in the subsequent period. It does not represent cash. It does represent a real earnings-quality item in the current period, and it does move the CFO’s forex line meaningfully at year-end when the rupee has moved sharply. A monthly restatement schedule for open monetary items — trade receivables, trade payables, foreign-currency loans, EEFC balances, foreign-currency cash — is the standard control that keeps the year-end restatement from being a one-time surprise.
Bucket 4 — Section 43A capital-asset carve-out
Section 43A of the Income-tax Act 1961 is the tax-side carve-out from the Ind AS 21 P&L route. Where a company acquires a capital asset from outside India, and the liability for that asset is denominated in foreign currency (or an External Commercial Borrowing is specifically drawn to fund the acquisition), any forex loss or gain on the acquisition liability does not go to the P&L as a forex item. It is added to or deducted from the actual cost of the asset and rolls into depreciation over the asset’s useful life.
Illustrative — a company imports plant and machinery for USD 500,000 on 15 June 2026 at a spot rate of Rs 83.00 (Rs 4,15,00,000 in the books as gross block, funded by a USD 500,000 ECB drawn the same day). The ECB is repaid a year later at a rate of Rs 85.00, so the repayment costs Rs 4,25,00,000. The Rs 10,00,000 forex loss on the ECB principal does not hit the P&L as forex loss — it is added to the actual cost of the plant and machinery under Section 43A, taking the tax gross block to Rs 4,25,00,000. The book gross block stays at Rs 4,15,00,000 and the Rs 10,00,000 sits as a forex loss on the P&L on the book side. This is one of the most common Ind AS-versus-tax reconciling differences on the tax computation, and one of the easiest to miss if the treasury working paper does not tag the ECB drawdown as capital-asset-linked at the time of drawdown.
Escalation first — the FEMA nine-month realisation clock
Buckets 1, 2, 3, and 4 are accounting reconciliations. The one bucket with a regulatory reporting obligation is the FEMA nine-month realisation clock on export receivables. The RBI Master Direction on Export of Goods and Services requires the full export value of goods or services to be realised and repatriated to India within nine months from the date of shipment (with narrower windows for warehouse-based exports and specific-country carve-outs). Missing the nine months triggers the AD Category-I bank to report the unrealised export to the Regional Office of the Reserve Bank, and the exporter enters the caution-list monitoring regime.
The finance function’s role is to reverse-calculate the nine-month clock from the shipment date on every open export receivable and route the escalation before it becomes a bank-side report. The recommended ladder — an analyst reminder to the sales and collections team at month six, a controller escalation to the CFO at month eight, and a formal AD bank request for a realisation extension at month nine on any receivable that has not been repatriated. Extensions are granted on a case-by-case basis for genuine trade disputes, buyer insolvency, or delayed clearance at the destination port, but the extension must be requested before the deadline expires — a retrospective request after the AD bank has already reported the unrealised export to the RBI is materially harder to obtain.
Layered on top of the FEMA clock is the Legal Entity Identifier requirement — every counterparty whose aggregated cross-border capital or current account exposure crosses USD 50 million over a financial year (in either direction) must have an LEI on file, or the AD bank will refuse to process the transaction that would breach the threshold. A mid-market exporter running eight USD 7 million shipments to the same buyer crosses the threshold on the eighth invoice and has to arrange LEI registration before the ninth remittance can settle.
Two treasury-side surfaces the buckets do not capture
Two overlays commonly complicate the four-bucket picture. First, hedge accounting under Ind AS 109 — a forward contract or a foreign-currency option booked against a receivable resets the effective rate on the hedged exposure to the hedge rate for accounting purposes. The forex P&L line then has to be read together with the hedge-effectiveness posting, and a reconciliation working paper that ignores the hedge overlay will show a forex line that ties to nothing.
Second, invoice-currency versus settlement-currency mismatch — a USD invoice settled in EUR or GBP passes through an intermediate cross-rate at the AD bank. The MT940 bank statement reconciliation walkthrough is the deeper treatment of how the SWIFT MT940 message flags this at the narration level, and the HDFC bank reconciliation walkthrough shows how the domestic AD bank’s advice comes through with the cross-rate split from the underlying currency conversion. Both surfaces sit inside a normal monthly bank reconciliation — see the bank reconciliation runbook for Days 1 to 5 of the monthly close — and both need the AD bank’s contract note or SWIFT confirmation to reconcile cleanly.
When the manual forex working paper outgrows itself
A monthly close with under fifty open foreign-currency monetary items — a mix of trade receivables, trade payables, and one or two ECB drawdowns — is comfortably manageable on a four-column Excel reconciliation. The bucket-wise decomposition takes an analyst two to three hours, the closing-rate restatement schedule takes another hour, and the FEMA nine-month tracker is a manageable side-sheet.
Above roughly 200 open foreign-currency monetary items, or where the FEMA nine-month countdown is tracking eight or more receivables in the final month of the window at any given time, the manual working paper stops holding. The bucket 2 bank-margin split needs to reconcile to a running FIRC/FIRA feed rather than a monthly reconciliation, the LEI threshold on aggregated counterparty exposure needs live monitoring rather than a quarterly review, and the closing-rate restatement needs to run daily on the open monetary-item ledger rather than as a month-end batch. The bank narration parser workbook is the standard template Terra Insight publishes for the AD bank narration parsing that feeds bucket 2, and above the manual threshold, moving the four-bucket decomposition onto continuously refreshed detection — where Terra Insight’s reconciliation software for India treats the FEMA nine-month clock and the LEI threshold monitor as first-class outputs — keeps the CFO’s forex line defensible against an Ind AS 21 audit sample and the treasury’s caution-list exposure at zero.
Go deeper
- Forex reconciliation for Indian companies — the pillar-level treatment of FEMA, Ind AS 21, and NOSTRO account matching
- HDFC bank reconciliation walkthrough — how the AD bank advice reconciles against the ERP forex receipt
- MT940 bank statement reconciliation — the SWIFT MT940 field-by-field walkthrough
- Bank reconciliation runbook for Days 1 to 5 of the monthly close — where the forex bucket splits into the daily rhythm
- Section 16(4) ITC time bar — where a forex-linked import ITC intersects the November 30 permanent deadline
- Bank narration parser workbook — free download
- Reconciliation software for India
Frequently Asked Questions
The bank credited a different INR amount than what my ERP shows. Which one is right?
Both are right — they are answering different questions. The ERP amount is the invoice booked at the spot rate on the invoice date under Ind AS 21 (or the payment posting date, depending on when the invoice was raised). The bank amount is the actual INR credited into the current account after the AD Category-I bank applied its own TT-buying rate — which sits below the FBIL reference rate by the bank’s margin (typically 15 to 50 paise on a USD conversion) plus the TT-buying versus TT-selling spread. The gap between the two is either a rate-movement item (the spot rate moved between invoice date and settlement date, a real forex gain or loss to the P&L) or a bank-margin item (the AD bank’s spread against the reference rate, a cost of transacting). The reconciliation working paper has to split the two — the rate-movement piece is the Ind AS 21 forex gain/loss; the bank-margin piece is a bank charge that classifies to the finance-cost line, not to forex, and reconciles cleanly against the bank’s contract-note documentation.
I paid a foreign vendor at a higher rate than I booked the invoice at — where does the difference go?
The difference is a forex loss on a monetary item under Ind AS 21 paragraph 28 and hits the P&L on the Foreign Exchange Gain / (Loss) line in the period in which the settlement happens. Illustrative arithmetic — a USD 10,000 invoice booked on 12 August 2026 at the spot rate of Rs 83.50 sits in the books at Rs 8,35,000. The vendor is paid on 5 September 2026 at the AD bank’s TT-selling rate of Rs 84.20, so the bank debit is Rs 8,42,000. The Rs 7,000 shortfall against the original booking is a forex loss to the P&L for FY 2026-27. The bank’s TT-selling rate versus the FBIL reference rate on the same day is a separate reconciliation — the bank spread of Rs 25 to Rs 50 paise per USD is finance cost, not forex loss. If the underlying transaction were a capital-asset import (imported machinery, an ECB loan drawdown), Section 43A of the Income-tax Act carves the same forex loss out of the P&L into the actual cost of the asset instead, which is a common book-versus-tax reconciling difference.
The invoice is a US dollar receivable that is still open at year-end. Do I restate it?
Yes — every foreign currency monetary item (payable, receivable, cash and bank balance in a foreign currency, foreign currency loan) open at the reporting date is restated to the closing rate under Ind AS 21. Illustrative arithmetic — the USD 10,000 receivable booked on 12 August 2026 at Rs 83.50 (Rs 8,35,000) that is still outstanding at 31 March 2027 is restated to the 31 March 2027 closing rate. If that closing rate is Rs 84.70, the receivable is carried at Rs 8,47,000 and a Rs 12,000 forex gain is recognised in the FY 2026-27 P&L. If the receivable is subsequently collected in FY 2027-28 at Rs 84.30, a further Rs 4,000 forex loss is recognised in FY 2027-28 — the net across two years is Rs 8,000 gain (Rs 12,000 minus Rs 4,000), which ties to the difference between the original booking rate (Rs 83.50) and the eventual settlement rate (Rs 84.30). Non-monetary items measured at historical cost (an advance paid in USD for services yet to be received) do not restate — they stay at the historical rate until the underlying is consumed.
The gap between the ERP invoice and the eventual settlement is larger than the rate movement can explain. What am I missing?
Three usual suspects. First, the AD bank’s TT-buying versus TT-selling spread — the receipt was converted at TT-buying, the payment was converted at TT-selling, and the round-trip spread of 25 to 75 paise per USD on the same underlying rate can look like a forex loss when it is actually a bank margin cost. Second, hedge accounting — a forward contract or a foreign-currency option booked against the receivable resets the effective rate to the hedge rate, and the P&L forex line has to be read together with the hedge-effectiveness posting under Ind AS 109. Third, invoice-currency versus settlement-currency mismatch — a USD invoice settled in EUR or GBP passes through an intermediate cross-rate at the bank that adds a second spread. All three are legitimate; all three surface in the same forex line unless the working paper separates them. A three-column reconciliation — invoice booking rate, hedge or contracted rate, bank settlement rate — is what makes the decomposition legible to the auditor and to the CFO.
What if I miss the FEMA nine-month realisation deadline on an export receivable?
The Master Direction on Export of Goods and Services requires the full export value to be realised and repatriated to India within nine months from the date of shipment (with narrower windows for warehouse-based exports and specific-country carve-outs). Missing the deadline triggers a two-track consequence. Track one — the AD Category-I bank has to report the unrealised export to the Regional Office of the Reserve Bank, which pushes the exporter into the RBI’s caution-list monitoring regime. Track two — the exporter can apply for an extension of the realisation period through the AD bank, and the RBI grants extensions on a case-by-case basis for genuine trade disputes, buyer insolvency, or delayed clearance at the destination port. From a book-side reconciliation standpoint, the receivable stays on the balance sheet at the closing rate under Ind AS 21 restatement, but the eighth-month restatement is the trigger point at which the finance function should escalate to the treasury and the AD bank rather than treat it as a routine forex working-paper item. This is the highest-severity bucket in the forex reconciliation because it converts an accounting variance into a regulatory reporting obligation.
Content authored by practitioners with experience at Amazon India, Intuit QuickBooks, and the Tata Group. Meet the team →
- ▸ Ind AS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates — A foreign currency transaction shall be recorded, on initial recognition in the functional currency, by applying to the foreign currency amount the spot exchange rate between the functional currency and the foreign currency at the date of the transaction. At the end of each reporting period, foreign currency monetary items shall be translated using the closing rate, non-monetary items measured in terms of historical cost in a foreign currency shall be translated using the exchange rate at the date of the transaction, and non-monetary items measured at fair value in a foreign currency shall be translated using the exchange rates at the date when the fair value was measured. Exchange differences arising on the settlement of monetary items or on translating monetary items at rates different from those at which they were translated on initial recognition during the period or in previous financial statements shall be recognised in profit or loss in the period in which they arise. Ind AS 21 is the reason the same USD 10,000 invoice carries three different INR figures across invoice date, settlement date, and reporting date, and the reason the differences flow to the P&L as forex gain or loss rather than sitting as unexplained variance.
- ▸ Section 43A, Income-tax Act 1961 — Where an assessee has acquired any asset from a country outside India for the purposes of his business or profession and, in consequence of a change in the rate of exchange during any previous year after the acquisition of such asset, there is an increase or reduction in the liability of the assessee as expressed in Indian currency for making payment towards the whole or a part of the cost of the asset or for repayment of the whole or a part of the moneys borrowed from any person, directly or indirectly, in any foreign currency specifically for the purposes of acquiring the asset, the amount by which the liability so increased or reduced during such previous year shall be added to, or deducted from, the actual cost of the asset. Section 43A carves capital-asset forex differences out of the Ind AS 21 P&L route — a forex loss on a machinery import loan does not hit the P&L as forex loss, it adjusts the actual cost of the machinery and rolls into depreciation over the asset's life. This is the single most common source of a book-versus-tax difference on the forex line.
- ▸ RBI Master Direction on Export of Goods and Services (July 2016, as amended) — The full export value of goods or software exported shall be realised and repatriated to India within nine months from the date of export, in respect of goods exported to a warehouse established outside India with the permission of the Reserve Bank; or from the date of shipment or export, in respect of exports of goods or software including the goods and software exported by a unit in a Special Economic Zone. Where any exporter fails to realise the full export value within the stipulated period, action shall be taken by the AD Category-I Bank against the exporter and the case reported to the Regional Office of the Reserve Bank concerned. The nine-month clock is what turns a routine forex-variance reconciliation into an escalation — an unrealised receivable at the end of month eight is not a P&L timing item any more, it is a FEMA compliance surface with a bank-side reporting obligation and a caution-listing risk to the exporter.
- ▸ RBI Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) Directions (2020, as amended) — It has been decided by the Reserve Bank of India to introduce the LEI system for capturing the correct legal identity of the counterparty in the participating entity's reporting to the Reserve Bank of India. Entities undertaking capital or current account transactions of USD 50 million and above (or equivalent in other currencies), whether individual or aggregated over a financial year, are required to obtain the LEI. Non-availability of LEI where mandated shall result in the AD Category-I Bank not undertaking or refusing to process the transaction. The USD 50 million threshold is an aggregation over the financial year against a single counterparty — a mid-market exporter running eight USD 7 million shipments to the same buyer crosses the threshold on the eighth invoice and has to arrange LEI registration or face the AD bank refusing to process the ninth remittance.
- ▸ Ind AS 21 paragraph 28 — Recognition of exchange differences — Exchange differences arising on the settlement of monetary items or on translating monetary items at rates different from those at which they were translated on initial recognition during the period or in previous financial statements shall be recognised in profit or loss in the period in which they arise. A monetary item that has been designated as a hedging instrument of a net investment in a foreign operation is a specific carve-out. In practical terms, every difference between the invoice-date rate and the payment-date rate on a monetary item (a foreign currency payable or receivable), and every difference between the last-translation rate and the closing rate on a monetary item still open at the reporting date, hits the P&L on the Foreign Exchange Gain / (Loss) line. Non-monetary items — inventory measured at historical cost, prepaid rent — do not restate, which is why an advance paid in USD for services yet to be received sits at the historical rate until the service is consumed.
- ▸ FBIL Reference Rate (successor to RBI Reference Rate) — Financial Benchmarks India Pvt Ltd (FBIL) publishes the reference rates for USD/INR and other major currencies every business day at 1:30 PM, based on a polled snapshot of the interbank spot market. The FBIL reference rate is the rate cited for statutory purposes — Section 92B transfer-pricing arm's-length pricing, ODI reporting, ECB drawdown accounting — and is distinct from both (a) the RBI reference rate legacy publication that has since transitioned to FBIL, and (b) the AD bank's card rate at which the actual conversion takes place. The AD bank's rate includes a margin (typically 15 to 50 paise for a USD conversion) over the interbank rate and a further TT-buying versus TT-selling spread of another 10 to 25 paise. A USD 10,000 receipt converted at the AD bank's TT-buying rate of Rs 83.80 against an FBIL reference of Rs 83.95 on the same day carries a Rs 1,500 book-versus-reference gap that has to be explained as bank spread, not lost in the forex line.