प्रमाण Praman
Evidence reconciliation & risk triage · EPR certificates · India

The demo database is asleep (free tier), so this page shows a saved copy. Live scoring below will work again once it wakes up.

Regulatory precedent replay

The regulator proved this check works. It took them years.

In its filing before the National Green Tribunal, CPCB set one recycler's electricity consumption against the tonnage it had invoiced for. Praman runs that reconciliation on every certificate, in under a second.

Not a live certificate · replay of a published record
42,781 kWh ÷ 20 kWh/t = 2,139.05 t
Technova Recycling India Pvt. Ltd. submitted 3,378 GST invoices. Its FY 2022–23 electricity consumption supports roughly 2,139 tonnes of rough plastic grinding. MPCB issued a show-cause notice for closure on 2 January 2024.
Source — CPCB reply filed before the National Green Tribunal, Appeal No. 148/2025 (pages 766-932). greentribunal.gov.in
Assumption — the 20 kWh/tonne figure is back-calculated from CPCB's own assessment in that filing. A configurable scenario assumption for rough grinding, not a universal constant — energy intensity varies by polymer, machinery and utilisation.

Score a claim yourself

Load a preset or type your own numbers. The engine scores it live in the database and returns the arithmetic behind every finding. Nothing typed here enters the register below — submissions are scored, then discarded.

A blank field means unknown — never zero.

Certificate register

Rajasthan, July 2026 — read live from the scoring database at page load. Open any row for the arithmetic and the statutory basis. Processor records are illustrative; the checks, the law and the precedents are real.

Certificate
Processor
Claimed
Unevidenced
Triage
EPR/RJ/2026/07/1104Shree Balaji PolyplastBhiwadi8,400 t6,261 tCRITICAL 100
ENERGY BALANCE+35 to score
75% of the claimed tonnage exceeds the energy-supported ceiling
42781 kWh / 20 kWh per tonne = 2139.05 t energy-supported ceiling. Claimed 8400 t. Excess 6260.95 t.
Basis — CPCB filing before NGT, Appeal 148/2025 (Technova Recycling): 3,378 GST invoices against 42,781 kWh, assessed as ~2,139 t. MPCB closure notice 02-01-2024.
Assumption — Back-calculated from CPCB's own assessment in its NGT filing (Appeal 148/2025): 42,781 kWh treated as corresponding to ~2,139 t of rough plastic grinding. Scenario assumption, not a universal constant.
CHAIN RECONCILIATION+30 to score
Claim exceeds the material that can be accounted for by 8250.00 t
Opening 10 t + procured 150 t - closing 8 t - rejects 2 t = 150.00 t accountable. Certificate claims 8400 t.
Basis — CPCB's operating directions require an auditable link between waste procurement and suppliers, actual processing against machinery capacity and electricity consumption, and output and sales. This is that link, closed.
Assumption — Mass balance assumes reported inventory and rejects are themselves truthful. It detects contradiction between a plant's own books and its certificate.
CAPACITY CEILING+20 to score
Claim exceeds consented monthly capacity by 28.0x
Consented 3600 TPA / 12 = 300.00 t/month. Claimed 8400 t.
Basis — PWM Rules Schedule II, clause 11.6, verbatim: "The pro forma for the certificate shall be developed by Central Pollution Control Board. In no case, the amount of plastic packaging waste recycled by the enterprise shall be more than installed capacity of the enterprise."
Assumption — Consent is a legal ceiling on permitted operation, not evidence of actual operation.
ATTESTATION GAP+15 to score
8400.00 t of 8400 t has no first-mile evidence behind it
Verified pickups 0.00 t against 8400 t claimed. Unattested 8400.00 t.
Basis — CPCB EPR portal Instruction Sheet — procurement entry fields (appears under Q16 and Q20), verbatim: "GST of Supplier (If GST is not available then PAN/Aadhar of Supplier has to be provided). Providing GST details of Supplier is mandatory for WtE/WtO & Co-processors."
Assumption — Attestations establish collection and handover. They do NOT establish that processing occurred.
PRICE OUTLIERexcluded from score
Reported output price Rs 6200/t sits below any plausible floor
Reported Rs 6200/t against an indicative floor of Rs 8000/t.
Basis — CPCB show-cause notice recorded a purported cement sale at Rs 9.36/tonne against 601.54 t of EPR potential.
Assumption — EXPERIMENTAL - excluded from the score. There is no category-, geography- and vintage-segmented transaction feed to benchmark against.
Score 100/100 from 4 scored checks — 35 + 30 + 20 + 15 = 100. Rule-based, every contributing check disclosed. Not a calibrated probability.
EPR/RJ/2026/07/0912Aravalli Waste Processors LLPAlwar1,150 t1,087 tHIGH 35
CAPACITY CEILING+20 to score
Claim exceeds consented monthly capacity by 1.2x
Consented 12000 TPA / 12 = 1000.00 t/month. Claimed 1150 t.
Basis — PWM Rules Schedule II, clause 11.6, verbatim: "The pro forma for the certificate shall be developed by Central Pollution Control Board. In no case, the amount of plastic packaging waste recycled by the enterprise shall be more than installed capacity of the enterprise."
Assumption — Consent is a legal ceiling on permitted operation, not evidence of actual operation.
ATTESTATION GAP+15 to score
1087.07 t of 1150 t has no first-mile evidence behind it
Verified pickups 62.93 t against 1150 t claimed. Unattested 1087.07 t.
Basis — CPCB EPR portal Instruction Sheet — procurement entry fields (appears under Q16 and Q20), verbatim: "GST of Supplier (If GST is not available then PAN/Aadhar of Supplier has to be provided). Providing GST details of Supplier is mandatory for WtE/WtO & Co-processors."
Assumption — Attestations establish collection and handover. They do NOT establish that processing occurred.
Score 35/100 from 2 scored checks — 20 + 15 = 35. Rule-based, every contributing check disclosed. Not a calibrated probability.
EPR/RJ/2026/07/0688Thar Reclaim IndustriesJodhpur190 t22 tREVIEW 15
ATTESTATION GAP+15 to score
21.74 t of 190 t has no first-mile evidence behind it
Verified pickups 168.26 t against 190 t claimed. Unattested 21.74 t.
Basis — CPCB EPR portal Instruction Sheet — procurement entry fields (appears under Q16 and Q20), verbatim: "GST of Supplier (If GST is not available then PAN/Aadhar of Supplier has to be provided). Providing GST details of Supplier is mandatory for WtE/WtO & Co-processors."
Assumption — Attestations establish collection and handover. They do NOT establish that processing occurred.
Score 15/100 from 1 scored check — 15. Rule-based, every contributing check disclosed. Not a calibrated probability.
EPR/RJ/2026/07/0431Marudhara Polymer Recyclers Pvt LtdJaipur28 t—CLEAR 0
All five checks reconcile.
Meter, mass balance, consented capacity and first-mile attestation all support the claimed tonnage.

What is actually checked

CPCB's own directions require an auditable link from procurement and suppliers, through processing against machinery capacity and electricity consumption, to output and sales. That reconciliation is mandated. It is not automated. These five implement it.

Energy balance

Does the meter support the tonnage claimed? You cannot melt plastic without electricity.

weight 35 · scored

Chain reconciliation

Opening stock + procured − closing − rejects. Material cannot leave a plant that never entered it.

weight 30 · scored

Capacity ceiling

Schedule II cl. 11.6 requires certificate quantities within installed capacity.

weight 20 · scored

First-mile attestation

How much traces to a named collector? Establishes collection — not processing.

weight 15 · scored

Price outlier

Output sold below any plausible floor. No segmented price feed exists to benchmark against.

experimental · excluded

What a misreported tonne costs

A statutory rate, not a market estimate.

₹5,000/t misreported → ₹10,000 → ₹20,000 on third default
The processor who misreports carries the compensation. The obligated buyer carries the clawback when a certificate it already paid for is voided.

What the rules actually say

Extracted verbatim from the source PDFs with pdftotext, not paraphrased. Each is quotable to a regulator.

PWM Rules Schedule II, clause 11.6
The pro forma for the certificate shall be developed by Central Pollution Control Board. In no case, the amount of plastic packaging waste recycled by the enterprise shall be more than installed capacity of the enterprise.
CPCB, Guidelines for Assessment of Environment Compensation to be levied for Violation of Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 (as amended) · source PDF
Schedule II, provisions 12.4, 13.1 & 11.6 — violator: Plastic Waste Processors
Misreporting in quantity of plastic procured, EPR plastic weight misreported (for certificate generated) — EC to be levied @ Rs. 5000/T of plastic weight misreported (for 2nd time default EC to be levied @ Rs.10000/- per ton and for 3rd time default @ Rs.20000/- per ton)
CPCB, Guidelines for Assessment of Environment Compensation, Schedule-II table · source PDF
PWM Rules Schedule II, clause 11.4
In case, at any stage it is found that the information provided by the plastic waste processor is false, the plastic waste processor shall be debarred by State Pollution Control Board, as per procedure laid down by Central Pollution Control Board, from operating under the Extended Producer Responsibility framework for a period of one year
CPCB, Guidelines for Assessment of Environment Compensation, Schedule-II table · source PDF
CPCB EPR portal Instruction Sheet — procurement entry fields (appears under Q16 and Q20)
GST of Supplier (If GST is not available then PAN/Aadhar of Supplier has to be provided). Providing GST details of Supplier is mandatory for WtE/WtO & Co-processors.
CPCB, Instruction Sheet, Centralized EPR Portal for Plastic Packaging · source PDF

Why this answers Kabadiwala Connect

The brief asks for a visible, efficient and fair recycling chain. Fairness here is a price problem, not an access problem — and the two halves below are held to different standards of proof, deliberately.

Evidenced

The informal collector is not excluded from the formal chain. CPCB's Instruction Sheet accepts PAN or Aadhaar where a supplier has no GST. Access is not the barrier.

Fabricated tonnage costs nothing to produce and settles the same obligation as material a person physically carried. Roughly 700,000 fake certificates exist — 38× the real certificate-generating capacity of India's recyclers.

documented · sourced to CPCB and CSE

Thesis — not yet measured

If fabricated supply becomes detectable, verified material should command a higher price, and formalising the collector should begin to pay for itself.

That is an argument from how the market clears. We have not measured a collector's income rising, and we do not claim it. It is the reason to build this, held apart from what the system proves today.

stated as a thesis · no result claimed

Which is why Praman is not another collection app. Six of those already exist. The unmet need is upstream: nobody scores the certificate itself.

Enforcement register

Real demands on record. Status is stated exactly — levied, ordered but under challenge, or press-reported only. None should be described as money recovered.

Enviro Recyclean Pvt. Ltd. Karnataka

Cleared to process 3.5 lakh tonnes per annum. Unit found not operational, yet EPR certificates for 3.48 lakh tonnes had been transferred to producers, importers and brand owners. Regional Officer letter dated 11-07-2024 levying Rs 174.25 crore.

KSPCB 248th Board-meeting proceedings, 02-12-2024 — Located on a third-party mirror, not an independently retrieved KSPCB-hosted original. Treat the amount as qualified.
₹174.25 cr
LEVIED - SOURCE QUALIFIED
The Shakti Plastics Industries Maharashtra

MPCB order dated 21-09-2024 recording compensation of Rs 136,99,42,000 plus Rs 1,00,000 penalty. A subsequent order dated 16-04-2026 records the challenge and directs further expert assessment.

MPCB order dated 21-09-2024, recorded in NGT proceedings — Under challenge. Must NOT be described as a final judicial finding or as money recovered.
₹137.00 cr
ORDERED - UNDER CHALLENGE
Technova Recycling India Pvt. Ltd. Maharashtra

Submitted 3,378 GST invoices. FY2022-23 electricity consumption of 42,781 kWh was assessed as corresponding to approximately 2,139 tonnes of rough plastic grinding. MPCB issued a show-cause notice for closure dated 02-01-2024.

CPCB reply filed before the National Green Tribunal, Appeal No. 148/2025 (pages 766-932) — The Rs 46.25 crore figure is press-reported (Indian Express) and is NOT a verified final assessment order or recovery record. The kWh, invoice count and tonnage assessment ARE in the CPCB filing.
₹46.25 cr
REPORTED ONLY
Asha Recyclean India Pvt. Ltd. Gujarat

GPCB action-taken letter dated 30-12-2023 states compensation of Rs 5,74,10,000 had been levied. Records closure on 16-11-2023, debarment, and revocation of consent.

GPCB action-taken letter, reproduced in CPCB report to NGT in OA No. 993 of 2024 — The only case in this table confirmed as actually LEVIED, with closure and debarment on record.
₹5.74 cr
LEVIED - CONFIRMED

Limits of this system

Stated plainly, because a claim that overstates itself invites the one question that unravels the rest.

  • This is evidence reconciliation, not fraud determination. It surfaces contradictions and missing evidence. It does not establish intent.
  • The score is rule-based, not a calibrated probability. 100/100 means every scored check failed and each is disclosed — not a 100% likelihood of anything.
  • Consented capacity is a legal ceiling, not proof of operation. It says what a facility may run, never what it did run.
  • Mass balance assumes the plant's own books are truthful. It detects contradiction between inventory and certificate, not a coordinated falsification of every record at once.
  • Attestations prove movement, not processing. One evidence layer among five.
  • Missing evidence is never a finding. An absent meter reading returns EVIDENCE INCOMPLETE and routes to manual review.
  • Nothing here is an EPR certificate. Only a registered processor may generate one. Any attestation Praman issues records verified collection and handover only.
  • On incumbents: our documented market scan found no incumbent publicly offering an independent certificate-level risk score. That is a scan, not a proof none exists.