Shares of One 97 Communications, the parent company of Paytm, rallied as much as 5% to their day’s high of Rs 1,166 on the BSE on Thursday after it reported a profit of Rs 184 crore for the fourth quarter, compared with a loss of Rs 540 crore in the same quarter last year.

The year-ago performance was impacted by a one-time charge linked to CEO Vijay Shekhar Sharma relinquishing his employee stock options. Revenue from operations for the quarter rose 18% year-on-year (YoY) to Rs 2,264 crore.

Paytm also reported a positive EBITDA of Rs 132 crore, versus a loss of Rs 88 crore a year earlier, though it was lower than the Rs 156 crore reported in the December quarter.

EBITDA margin came in at 6%, compared with a negative 5% in the corresponding period last year. The company said comparable EBITDA, excluding UPI and PIDF incentives, improved by Rs 330 crore year-on-year, indicating stronger underlying profitability.

Paytm shares: Should you buy, sell or hold?

Jefferies has maintained a Buy rating on Paytm with a target price of Rs 1,350, an upside of 22% from current levels. The brokerage said revenue momentum helped offset the impact of missing UPI incentives during the quarter.
The Wall Street major highlighted that revenue growth of 18% was driven by the financial services business and came despite the absence of both PIDF and UPI incentives.The brokerage added that Paytm’s strong revenue momentum could continue to support earnings even amid risks related to UPI incentives.

Bernstein has maintained its “Outperform” rating on Paytm with a target price of Rs 1,500. Looking ahead, Bernstein expects non-linear EBITDA expansion over FY26-30, driven by revenue growth of over 20% along with disciplined cost management. The brokerage further noted that indirect expenses remained well controlled, rising 3% sequentially while declining 3% YoY. Payment margin, however, fell to 9 basis points due to the discontinuation of PIDF incentives.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

A major food brand is being sued over claims it falsely marketed its canned tomatoes as premium “San Marzano” products.

Cento Fine Foods, based in New Jersey, is facing a proposed class action lawsuit claiming it misled consumers by labeling its tomatoes as “certified” San Marzano despite allegedly failing to meet the strict standards associated with the variety, according to a May 4 complaint filed in federal court in California.

“San Marzano tomatoes are considered the Ferrari or Prada of canned tomato varieties,” the lawsuit states, quoting Martha Stewart’s website. “Loyalists say they are well worth the higher price tag compared to other Italian or domestically produced options.”

RISING COSTS, LOYAL CUSTOMERS: INSIDE A STATEN ISLAND RESTAURANT EMPIRE

“San Marzano” refers to both a variety of tomato and a region in Italy where they are traditionally grown. The tomatoes are a type of plum tomato, typically longer and more slender than standard varieties, with a distinct pointed end and fewer seeds, according to Martha Stewart’s website.

Under European Union rules, authentic San Marzano tomatoes carry a “Protected Designation of Origin” (DOP) status — similar to products like Champagne — meaning they must be grown and processed in a designated region of southern Italy and meet strict production standards.

The complaint alleges Cento’s use of “certified” falsely suggests the products are officially recognized San Marzano tomatoes, calling the brand “the primary culprit of this tomato fraud in the United States.”

“Defendant’s claims that its tomatoes are ‘certified’ ‘San Marzano’ tomatoes misleadingly convey that the product is the famous San Marzano tomato certified by and exceeding the standards of Consorzio di Tutela del Pomodoro San Marzano dell’Agro Sarnese-Nocerino when in fact the product does not meet that standard,” the complaint states.

COSTCO RECALLS POPULAR PRODUCT IN 2 STATES OVER POTENTIAL INGREDIENT MIX-UP

The plaintiffs say they bought Cento’s San Marzano tomatoes believing they were “authentic.” They allege the products fell short of true DOP standards and say they “would never have purchased Cento San Marzanos” if they had known.

The lawsuit seeks at least $25 million in restitution and changes to Cento’s business practices.

In a statement to “Good Morning America,” an attorney for Cento pushed back on the allegations.

“We believe this claim is entirely without merit. We have previously successfully defended a comparable lawsuit in New York federal court and will defend this claim vigorously as well, including seeking prompt dismissal,” the attorney said.

POPULAR POTATO CHIPS RECALLED DUE TO SALMONELLA FEARS

The company has previously faced similar claims. In a 2019 class action lawsuit, Cento said it “refutes” allegations that its tomatoes are not genuine.

“Our fields and farmers are audited by an independent third party in Italy who assures that the tomatoes are grown in the rich fertile soil of Sarnese-Nocerino at the base of Mt. Vesuvius in Campagna,” the company said at the time.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

That case was dismissed in 2020, “Good Morning America” reported.

Cento Fine Foods did not immediately respond to FOX Business’ request for comment.

Operator

Good day, and welcome to the Velocity Financial First Quarter of 2026 Results Conference Call. Please note that today’s event is being recorded. [Operator Instructions]

I would now like to turn the call over to the Treasurer, Chris Oltmann. Please go ahead.

Christopher Oltmann
Corporate Treasurer & Director of Investor Relations

Thanks, Joe. Hello, everyone, and thank you for joining us today for the discussion of Velocity’s first quarter 2026 results. Joining me today are Chris Farrar, Velocity’s President and Chief Executive Officer; and Mark Szczepaniak, Velocity’s Chief Financial Officer.

Earlier this afternoon, we released a press release with our first quarter results, and you can find the press release and accompanying presentation that we will refer to during this call on our Investor Relations website at www.velfinance.com.

I’d like to remind everybody that today’s call may include forward-looking statements, which are uncertain and outside of the company’s control, and actual results may differ materially. For a discussion of some of the risks and other factors that could affect results, please see the risk factors and other cautionary statements made in our communications with shareholders, including the risk factors disclosed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Please also note that the content of this conference call contains time-sensitive information that is accurate only as of today, and we do not undertake any duty to update forward-looking statements.

We may also refer to certain non-GAAP measures on this call. For reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures, you

Kolkata: India’s efforts to draw more dollar investments, likely from non-residents, would probably need the central bank’s support the ensure that the exchange risks are covered and yields are higher than in global markets, particularly the US, economists said.

“We are pencilling in a large balance of payment (BOP) deficit of around $68 billion in FY27. Unless the global backdrop changes to lower oil prices, this is the gap that will likely need to be plugged via the forex deposit scheme being considered,” Nomura’s Sonal Varma said in a report.

After a 6% retreat in the currency in 2026 and the worst fiscal-year fall in 14 years in FY26, the rupee’s performance has often been cited as the cause for persistent exits by overseas funds. Recent media reports suggest the central bank might start a dedicated program to draw dollar inflows, although Mint Road has not confirmed the likelihood of any such program.

Nomura said that such programs need to account for higher dollar deposit rates globally compared to domestic deposit costs. Nomura argued that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) may need to provide higher subsidies to make such a scheme attractive for banks.

According to a Reuters report on May 4, two options are being explored by the RBI-reviving a scheme similar to the 2013 FCNR(B) scheme and eliminating the 5% withholding tax on overseas government bond investors to encourage inflows.

A Bloomberg report the next day suggested the RBI is discussing an option similar to the India Millennium Deposits (IMD) in 2000, under which State Bank of India (SBI) had issued foreign-currency bonds.
The global interest rates are much higher today than in 2013, when US policy rates were near zero.

Sweeten the Deal
“This may mean that the structure of any new scheme being considered will need to be modified to account for higher dollar deposit rates globally and lower domestic deposit costs. This may require a higher subsidy from the RBI to make the scheme attractive for banks,” Varma said.

Bank of Baroda chief economist Madan Sabnavis differed with the view on the need for special schemes to attract dollars. “If remittances and NRI deposits are not rising, the expat population has a problem and will not be able to invest in such bonds even if issued,” he said.

However, he suggested that if India at all issues bonds like IMD, the yield would have to be higher than local deposit rates in the US.

“For them to be feasible for Indian banks, the rate should still be lower than domestic deposits. Otherwise, it may not be viable especially as exchange risk is taken on by the banks,” he said, adding that the exchange risk is something where the government or RBI has to take on.

Earlier, India had come out with three specific schemes to attract dollar-denominated investments- the Resurgent India Bonds (1998), the India Millennium Deposit (2000) and the FCNR(B) swap window (2013).

In the Nifty200 pack, 10 stocks’ closing prices crossed above their 200 DMA (Daily Moving Averages) on May 06, 2026, according to stockedge.com’s technical scan data. The 200-day daily moving average (DMA) is used by traders as a key indicator for determining the overall trend in a particular stock. As long as the stock is priced above the 200-day SMA on the daily timeframe, it is generally considered to be in an overall uptrend. Take a look:

TUCSON, Ariz. — As the search for 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie enters its fourth month, NewsNation senior correspondent Brian Entin has spotlighted a disturbing new theory: the masked suspect captured on her doorbell camera — the prime figure in her suspected abduction — may already be dead, possibly eliminated by a higher-up to tie up loose ends.

The revelation, featured in NewsNation’s one-hour special “The Nancy Guthrie Mystery” airing Wednesday, May 6, 2026, comes from a panel of top criminal profilers and forensic experts dissecting the high-profile case that has captivated the nation since Guthrie vanished from her Tucson-area home. The special will broadcast on The CW.

Guthrie, mother of “Today” show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, was last seen Jan. 31, 2026, after dinner with family. She was reported missing the next day. Authorities found blood on her porch, a propped-open back door and chilling footage of an armed, masked individual at her front door around 2 a.m. Feb. 1. Her pacemaker disconnected from her phone at 2:28 a.m., suggesting a sudden, forceful removal.

No suspect has been publicly named. No ransom has been paid. Guthrie remains missing despite extensive searches, FBI involvement and a $1 million family reward.

The Doorbell Camera Clue and “Porch Guy” Theory

Surveillance video shows the suspect, often called “Porch Guy,” approaching Guthrie’s door, appearing to tamper with the camera before the system went offline. He carried a backpack and what appeared to be a weapon. A second image later emerged showing the same individual at her home days earlier, raising questions about prior surveillance or familiarity.

In the NewsNation special, forensic nurse and criminal profiling pioneer Dr. Ann Burgess floated the idea that this suspect may no longer be alive. “The person we see at the front door could be dead … killed by someone else … killed by the boss,” Entin summarized during the roundtable discussion. Burgess agreed the operation appeared well-planned yet contained amateur elements, consistent with a hired operative who was later silenced.

Criminal psychologist Dr. Gary Brucato echoed the possibility of multiple perpetrators. “I don’t believe this person worked alone,” he said, describing a potential “spider web” of involvement with a schemer directing a less sophisticated actor. The theory suggests internal conflict or a cleanup phase after the abduction to prevent the porch suspect from talking if caught.

Investigation Challenges and Early Missteps

Pima County Sheriff’s Office initially treated the case as a missing person, with some speculation Guthrie may have wandered off. Critics, including former officials and Entin’s sources, pointed to delays in elevating it to a full abduction probe and limited early FBI involvement. DNA evidence recovered from the scene was only recently sent for advanced FBI lab analysis.

Sources told Entin there is still “no name on the table” as a primary suspect. The investigation has examined possible financial motives, prior knowledge of Guthrie’s home layout and even theories involving retribution linked to Savannah Guthrie’s public profile. Ransom-style notes received by media outlets, including demands for Bitcoin, have surfaced but remain unverified.

One theory explored by experts: Guthrie may have known or trusted the person enough to open the door without immediate alarm, though blood evidence indicates a struggle on the porch.

Family Agony and Public Appeals

Savannah Guthrie has spoken emotionally about her mother’s disappearance while returning to work. The family has offered escalating rewards and cooperated fully with investigators, who have cleared them as suspects. Neighbors remain uneasy, with some fearing the perpetrator could strike again.

The case has drawn parallels to other high-profile abductions, with profilers noting the lack of communication from any kidnappers after initial activity as unusual — potentially explained if the operative is deceased and the operation compromised.

Broader Questions: Motive, Mexico Links and DNA Hopes

Speculation has included a possible crossing into Mexico, with unverified tips claiming Guthrie was seen alive in Sonora shortly after the abduction. Some investigators suggested she may have suffered a medical issue in captivity, leading to her death and complicating ransom efforts.

Pima County Sheriff’s Office reiterated May 4 that the case “remains active and ongoing,” with continued FBI partnership, tip review and forensic work. Advances in DNA technology offer hope for breakthroughs even months later.

Entin, who has covered the story extensively on the ground in Tucson, emphasized in the special that experts draw from patterns in past cases. The amateur-yet-targeted nature points to possible hired help rather than a lone opportunist.

What Comes Next

As the search surpasses 90 days, attention focuses on whether the porch suspect’s identity can be established through enhanced video analysis or public tips. If he is deceased, it could explain the investigative silence and shift focus to organizers or accomplices.

Criminologist Dr. Casey Jordan suggested the suspect may have had indirect familiarity through media exposure of the Guthrie family but was unlikely someone Nancy knew personally.

The case highlights vulnerabilities for high-profile families and elderly residents in suburban areas. It also underscores challenges in jurisdictions handling rare kidnappings, with calls for faster federal involvement in future cases.

For the Guthrie family, every day without answers deepens the pain. Savannah and her siblings continue advocating for tips, urging anyone with information to come forward. The $1 million reward remains active.

Brian Entin’s reporting and the expert roundtable offer no definitive closure but introduce a grim possibility: the man on the porch camera — potentially the last person to see Nancy Guthrie alive — may himself have become a victim in a larger, more calculated scheme.

Authorities urge the public to review any footage from late January and early February 2026 in the Catalina Foothills area. Even small details, they say, could prove significant in unraveling what happened that night and whether Nancy Guthrie’s kidnapper is still a threat — or already beyond justice.

Tesla is recalling more than 218,000 vehicles because of ‌delayed rearview camera images that could increase the risk of ​a crash, the National ​Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced on ⁠Wednesday.

A total of 218,868 Model 3, Model Y, Model ‌S ⁠and Model X vehicles are affected by the recall.

The vehicles include the 2021 Tesla Model Y, 2022 Tesla Model Y, 2023 Tesla Model Y, 2023 Tesla Model 3, 2021 Tesla Model 3, 2022 Te

sla Model 3, 2020 Tesla Model Y, 2022 Tesla Model X, 2022 Tesla Model S, 2021 Tesla Model S, 2023 Tesla Model X, 2023 Tesla Model S, 2021 Tesla Model X and 2017 Tesla Model 3.

FORD RECALLS OVER 179,000 BRONCO AND RANGER VEHICLES OVER SEAT DEFECT

The impacted vehicles feature hardware version 3, which Tesla stopped producing in January 2024.

According to the NHTSA, the ​rearview camera display in impacted ​vehicles may be delayed when the car is put into reverse, which hurts ​driver visibility.

“Loss of the rearview camera image may affect the driver’s rearview and increase the risk of a collision,” the NHTSA said in its recall notice. “The driver may continue to reverse the vehicle by performing a shoulder check and using their mirrors.”

Tesla said there have been no reports of collisions, fatalities or injuries due to the rearview camera issue, but there have been 27 warranty claims and two field reports that may be connected to the problem.

Stocks In This Article:

The company said it will issue a free over-the-air software update to customers. The faulty software is version 2026.8.6. The remedy software is version 2026.8.6.1.

“More than 99.92% of the affected vehicle population have successfully loaded the remedy firmware,” Tesla wrote in its announcement.

TOYOTA RECALLS 73K HYBRID VEHICLES OVER PEDESTRIAN WARNING SOUND ISSUE

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

This comes after the NHTSA closed an investigation last month into about 2.6 million ​Tesla vehicles over a ​feature ⁠that allowed cars to be moved remotely after determining the issue was only linked ​to low-speed incidents.