References & Sources
Evidence used to explain the general principle. These references do not replace personal scholar review.
2 Sources & 0 Scholarly Opinions
Zomato (now listed as Eternal Ltd) presents a genuine screening challenge for Muslim investors because the company facilitates the delivery of both permissible food and alcohol through the same platform, making a clean sector exclusion difficult — but the company also passes several financial ratio screens on debt and interest income. The question is not simple; it turns on whether alcohol-related revenue crosses the standard 5% impermissible revenue threshold and how alcohol facilitation is classified under Islamic screening methodology, which is genuinely contested among Islamic finance scholars who have reviewed Indian food delivery platforms. Run Zomato through a current Shariah screener and, if it clears, apply the standard income purification on your investment returns.
Use this as general guidance for the topic. If your facts, contract, role, amount, or local law differ, ask a qualified scholar with the full details.
Verified by
Before you act
Bring exact facts, documents, alternatives, and local context to a qualified scholar. This is a general principle, not your private ruling.
Educational guidance only, not a fatwa. Consult a qualified scholar for your specific case. Page created July 1, 2026.
Personal Islamic guidance
Use HalalClarity Advisory for your own investment situation, income doubts, contracts, investments, or sensitive decisions. Ask a quick question, then create a scholar-ready report when the matter needs review.
Because the company is a marketplace that facilitates both permissible and impermissible transactions through the same platform. A company that only sells alcohol is clearly excluded. A company that only delivers food is clearly included. Zomato does both — and the screening question is whether the alcohol-related portion of its business crosses the quantitative threshold (generally 5% of revenue) that triggers exclusion. The answer depends on current revenue data that the company does not publicly disaggregate, making this a genuine borderline case rather than a clear ruling.
Blinkit delivers groceries, household goods, and consumer products — primarily permissible categories. Its growth as a share of total revenue actually dilutes the proportional weight of alcohol-related delivery revenue, which may improve Zomato's screening outcome as Blinkit scales. However, Blinkit also delivers alcohol in some markets, so the same analysis applies across both verticals. The overall effect of Blinkit's expansion is typically neutral-to-positive for Shariah screening purposes given its predominantly permissible product mix.
This is the methodological disagreement that makes Zomato genuinely contested. One school of thought treats marketplace facilitators more leniently — the company earns a commission, and the direct transaction is between the restaurant/store and the consumer. Another school holds that actively enabling and profiting from each alcohol transaction, per order, is participation in that prohibited sale. AAOIFI's screening standards apply revenue thresholds without distinguishing facilitation from direct sale, which is why screeners using that methodology evaluate Zomato's alcohol commission revenue the same way they would evaluate direct alcohol sales revenue.
Evidence used to explain the general principle. These references do not replace personal scholar review.
2 Sources & 0 Scholarly Opinions
Compare the general position and the details scholars usually check.
Was this page helpful?
Browse more seeded questionsRelated questions help you compare similar Islamic finance and halal income cases.