Strong execution but strategic de-risking limits upside
The verdict, the claims that held up, the sharpest analyst exchanges, and the risks — the earnings call, decoded from the transcript.
Hold
confidence 7/10
Grade B
Execution on track (20 GW, battery pace). De-risking via AESL is prudent but signals lower return assumptions vs. prior merchant strategy.
Cautiously Optimistic
next 1–2 quarters
Optimistic
multi-year
Adani Green delivered solid operational momentum (20 GW milestone, 3.5 GW-hour battery installed) and financial growth (16.6% revenue, 19.3% PAT YoY). Management's de-risking strategy—contracting merchant capacity to AESL at fixed 25-year rates—prioritizes predictable returns over market upside. Transmission constraints (5-7% curtailment impact, 7 GW evacuation capacity by Sep 2026) and battery supply chain/timing risks remain. OPM of 89.9% shows strong asset quality, but the locked-in AESL terms cap upside relative to the 50 GW by 2030 aspiration.
₹4431 Cr
Revenue · +16.6% YoY₹983 Cr
Reported PAT · +19.3% YoYExpanding
Margins · vs guidance: MixedDid the claims hold up?
Revenue from power supply increased 29% YoY to ₹4,280 Cr
OVERSTATEDConsolidated revenue ₹4,431 Cr, YoY growth 16.6%; power supply subset claim not directly verifiable
EBITDA from power supply ₹4,122 Cr, 94% margin
PartialReported OPM 89.9%; power supply excludes battery, so metric not directly comparable
4.3 GW capacity addition, 27% increase; on track for 5 GW FY27 target
METDelivered results don't break down capacity additions, but 20 GW milestone confirmed; Q1 pace plausible for 5 GW annual
Curtailment impact 5-7% on overall EBITDA; expected to resolve by end of calendar year
METSpecific claim on curtailment impact; transmission bottleneck acknowledged but 7 GW evacuation capacity expected by Sep 2026
1.9 GW-hour battery commissioned in Q1, on track for 10+ GW-hour FY27 target
METBattery financials not separately reported, but capacity milestones plausible and management confident
Earnings quality
What changed since the last call
Strategic pivot to de-risking via AESL
NewPrior guidance: merchant capacity + recovery through BESS/PPAs. New: 4 GW merchant→C&I to AESL at benchmark rates, 25-yr fixed solar/wind, 15-yr fixed battery. Removes upside but locks returns.
Battery storage role elevated
UpgradeFY26 guidance was vague on battery; now 10+ GW-hour FY27 target, 50 GW-hour by 2030, separate reporting. 1.9 GW commissioned Q1 on track.
Transmission timeline confirmed
Neutral7 GW evacuation by Sep 2026 (end of calendar year), balance by Q2 FY28. Addresses prior curtailment concern; execution risk remains.
Capex guidance reaffirmed, not upgraded
Neutral₹42,000 Cr FY27 capex (was ₹40-42k prior guidance range); no upside surprise. Already ₹8,800 Cr spent in Q1.
The Q&A
Analysts pressed hard on AESL contract terms, pricing, and termination clauses; management clarified SECI PPA–like, 25-yr fixed, no convenience exit. Questioned merchant capacity strategy reversal; CEO defended de-risking rationale. Battery timing and supply chain risk raised; CFO expressed confidence but would not commit to quarterly phasing. Rooftop solar threat raised; management dismissed as complementary, not cannibalistic. Overall: management held ground, direct answers on strategy, light on specifics on AESL pricing.
Curtailment impact — Nikhil Nigania, analyst
Answered5-7% EBITDA impact currently; by end of calendar year with further transmission lines, no curtailment expected at least from Khavda
Merchant-to-C&I shift — Nikhil Nigania, analyst
AnsweredDe-risk market ups/downs, concentrate on execution & operational excellence, secure long-term predictable returns matching our expectations for 25 years
AESL contract terms — Apoorva Bahadur, Cantor Fitzgerald
PartialBenchmark rates per IEX historical averages + ARM-s-length approval; solar/wind ₹2.7-3.5/kWh typical; battery evaluated on IEX trends + return profile; no price reset, fully fixed
Battery deployment phasing — Bhagya Biradar, analyst
PartialWill not give quarterly guidance due to commissioning & stabilization phases typical of new battery projects; on track for FY27 target but timing fluid
PPA coverage and seasonal variability — Swetha Rakhecha, Cantor Fitzgerald
AnsweredMostly structural; CUF is key metric. Historical average 109-110% annually; Q1 typically stronger. Expect similar cadence rest of year
Transmission evacuation timeline — Swetha Rakhecha, Cantor Fitzgerald
Answered7 GW by end of calendar year; balance within next quarter or two. Monitoring delays; if delays occur, we can reduce capex impact or advance if earlier
Merchant realization pricing — Shirom Kapur, analyst
AnsweredIn line with merchant power including RECs; ranges around ₹2.5 per unit
Battery economics and cycles — Bhagya Biradar, analyst
PartialArbitrage model: buy at ₹2.5, sell at ₹4-5 in evenings. Looked at 36-mo/24-mo/12-mo trends. Will take 1-2 years to know if >1 cycle/day possible; studying dynamic cycle patterns
Rooftop solar competition — Dhruv Muchhal, analyst
AnsweredIndia demand growing with GDP; both utility and rooftop can coexist. Evening/night demand favors utility-scale and storage. No major utility segment threat
Battery fire risk mitigation — Abhishek Khanna, analyst
AnsweredCompetitor fire was in PCS inverter, not battery—IGBT failure common, not battery-specific. We use T1 vendors with European-grade safety. Standard insurance covers like any equipment; rigorous underwriting by agents
AESL exit/termination clauses — Nikhil Nigania, analyst
AnsweredSECI PPA-like; no convenience termination. De-risks AGEL from market swings and delivers predictable returns we built for. Risk of price advantage waivers sits with AESL 25 years
Large site pipeline beyond Khavda — Nikhil Nigania, analyst
DodgedSeriously evaluating many large sites, Khavda experience very positive. Difficult to specify scale in advance; very, very large sites; will disclose when formalized as public company
BESS capex and warranty — Bhavik Shah, Q&A box
AnsweredThumb rule ₹1.5 Cr per MW-hour; may vary by 2-hr vs 4-hr system. Varies by rupee/dollar rate and specs. Warranty via standard insurance policies; T1 OEM vendors
Guidance
FY27 revenue dependent on 5 GW + 10+ GWh battery ramp
MediumNo explicit revenue target given; capex ₹42k Cr implies strong capital deployment but battery EBITDA modeling uncertain
Run-rate EBITDA ₹21,000 Cr by FY27 end (vs ₹17,000 Cr current)
Medium23.6% step-up implies battery/new capacity kicks in; assumption is ₹25-30 lakh/MW-hr battery EBITDA contribution
BESS EBITDA ₹25-30 lakh per MW-hour once capitalized
LowNew product; based on arbitrage model (₹2.5 buy, ₹4-5 sell), but cycles/utilization not yet proven
FY27 capex ₹42,000 Cr (consistent with ₹40-42k prior range)
High5 GW RE expansion + 10+ GW-hr battery + 500 MW pump hydro. ₹1.5 Cr per MW-hr battery cost thumb rule
Risks the call surfaced
Transmission capacity constraint
MediumCurtailment impact 5-7% on EBITDA currently. 7 GW evacuation capacity expected by Sep 2026; if delayed, further energy loss. Khavda 10+ GW capacity dependent on timely transmission upgrades.
Battery supply chain & cost
MediumBESS capex ₹1.5 Cr/MW-hr is thumb rule sensitive to rupee/dollar rates, vendor availability. New technology in India; commissioning delays or cost overruns possible. Commissioning & stabilization phases unpredictable.
AESL contract lock-in risk
MediumDe-risking via 25-year fixed-price AESL contracts eliminates merchant upside. If future long-term market rates exceed benchmark (₹2.7-3.5 for solar/wind), AGEL returns are capped. No price reset clauses.
Rooftop solar competitive threat
LowRooftop solar installations ramped 8 GW in FY26, ~4-5 GW in Q1 FY27 (~12 GW run-rate annually). Could displace utility-scale demand or suppress PPA tariffs if penetration accelerates.
Battery fire and safety risk
LowCompetitor battery fire incident (PCS inverter, not cell, but high-profile). LFP energy density high; requires rigorous safety protocols. Insurance and warranty coverage needed.
Management
Score 7/10. Clear on strategic pivot (de-risking via AESL), direct on operational metrics (curtailment %, merchant prices, capex). Withheld specific AESL pricing details (benchmark vs exact rates). Did not commit to battery quarterly phasing. Met prior 4.5-5 GW capacity guidance pace (4.3 GW added Q1). 20 GW milestone achieved. Battery 3.5 GW-hour in Q1 on track for 10+ GW-hour FY27. Run-rate EBITDA ₹17k Cr current vs ₹21k Cr FY27 end guidance (23.6% ramp).
1 · Sep 2026
7 GW transmission evacuation capacity online; curtailment relief expected
2 · Q4 FY27
Chitravathi 500 MW pump storage commissioning; 10+ GW-hour battery cumulative target
3 · FY27 end
₹42,000 Cr capex deployment completion; BESS EBITDA contribution ramp
OPM of 89.9% shows strong asset quality, but the locked-in AESL terms cap upside relative to the 50 GW by 2030 aspiration.
Locked-in Growth: Solid Execution, Strategic Upside Cap
Adani Green hit its operational targets—20 GW milestone, battery deployment on pace—but management's pivot to fixed-price AESL contracts reframes the story from merchant upside to predictable returns. The market was unimpressed: stock fell 6.28% day 1, now 14% off its highs.
₹4,431 Cr
+16.6% YoY
₹983 Cr
+19.3% YoY
89.9%
power supply claim 94%
20 GW
4.3 GW added Q1
3.5 GW-hr
1.9 GW added Q1
₹8,800 Cr
+41% YoY; on track for ₹42k Cr FY27
On the headline, Adani Green's Q1 looks solid: ₹4,431 crore revenue, ₹983 crore PAT, strong 89.9% operating margin, and the symbolic 20 GW cumulative capacity milestone. But the market's 6.28% fall on announcement day—and a 14.45% drawdown from its all-time high since then—signals investor unease with the strategic shift this quarter represents. The story is less about the numbers than about what management did with them: de-risk returns, lock them in via 25-year fixed-price contracts with AESL, and accept lower upside in exchange for predictability.
The Margin Puzzle: Power Supply +29%, Consolidated +16.6%
Management cited power supply revenue growth of 29% YoY to ₹4,280 crore, but the consolidated result shows only 16.6% YoY growth to ₹4,431 crore. The gap suggests battery energy storage segment is now material enough to dilute the consolidated number—a positive in absolute terms (battery is scaling), but it also means power supply is running hotter than the headline implies. EBITDA from power supply was claimed at ₹4,122 crore with a 94% margin, but reported operating margin on the consolidated result is 89.9%, indicating battery (not yet profitable at scale) is dragging the overall margin down. This is not a red flag—it's normal for a new segment ramp—but it explains why the quarter feels less impressive than the power-supply-only metrics suggest.
Power supply revenue +29% YoY to ₹4,280 Cr
Consolidated revenue +16.6% to ₹4,431 Cr; power supply subset not directly verifiable from P&L
Overstated (subset vs total; likely accurate on power supply alone but headline grew slower)
EBITDA from power supply ₹4,122 Cr at 94% margin
Reported OPM 89.9% consolidated; battery/other segments pull down the all-in margin
Partial (power supply EBITDA likely accurate, but consolidated picture is lower)
4.3 GW capacity added Q1; on track for 5 GW FY27 target
Delivered results don't break down quarterly additions by segment, but 20 GW milestone confirmed; pace plausible
Supported
Curtailment impact 5–7% on overall EBITDA; relief by end of calendar year
Specific claim; 7 GW transmission evacuation expected by Sep 2026; balance by Q2 FY28
Supported
1.9 GW battery commissioned in Q1; on track for 10+ GW-hour FY27
3.5 GW-hour total installed Q1; quarterly phasing not separately disclosed but management confident
Supported
What Changed on This Call: The De-Risking Pivot
Prior FY26 guidance was merchant-focused: 4.5–5 GW capacity, battery storage to recover curtailment losses via BESS/long-term PPAs. This quarter, management announced a strategic pivot: convert 4 GW of merchant capacity to fixed-price AESL (Adani Energy Supply Limited) contracts at 25-year terms, plus 3.5 GW-hour battery supply to AESL at 15-year fixed rates. The pricing: solar/wind at benchmark ₹2.7–3.5 per kWh (indexed to historical IEX averages), battery evaluated on IRR hurdle-rate (15–16%) but no price-reset clauses. This is not opportunistic growth; it is deliberate de-risking.
Management's rationale is sound: reduce merchant volatility, concentrate on execution and operational excellence, lock predictable returns matching their return thresholds for 25 years. But the trade-off is real. If long-term power prices exceed ₹2.7–3.5 per kWh (which is plausible if demand grows faster than supply), Adani Green is contractually bound to those rates and cannot capture upside. The original 50 GW by 2030 target remains, but it is now a de-risked 50 GW, not a merchant one.
Battery storage role also changed: FY26 guidance vague on battery specifics; now 10+ GW-hour FY27 target with separate tracking and revenue contribution. This is credible (1.9 GW deployed in Q1 alone) but also signals a bet that battery arbitrage will work at scale (buy at ₹2.5 per unit, sell at ₹4–5 in evenings). Management did not commit to quarterly phasing, citing commissioning variability—a hedge worth noting.
Market Positioning: Price Action, Ownership, Insider Flows
₹1,395.1
−6.28% day 1 post-result
₹1,630.8
−14.45%
₹1,516
below by 8.0%
₹1,133
above by 23.1%
11.10%
down 48bp QoQ from 11.58%
62.43%
steady
₹2.15 Cr shares
Ardour Investment → Adani Infra @ ₹1,510
The market's -6.28% day-1 reaction is telling. Adani Green's operational credentials are sound—20 GW milestone, battery scale-up, execution on capex, strong margins. But the post-result drawdown and FII trimming (down 48 basis points QoQ) suggest institutional investors are voting against the de-risking strategy. They want merchant upside, not contractual predictability. The recent block deal (Ardour Investment selling ₹2.15 crore shares to Adani Infra at ₹1,510 per share) appears routine—Ardour is typically a holding company for Adani group—but it occurred near current prices, not at a discount, suggesting no forced selling or distress. Volume is normal; RSI 33.8 is neutral-to-oversold, consistent with a mid-drawdown consolidation.
The stock now sits 14.45% below its all-time high but 82.37% above its 52-week low (₹765), indicating recovery after a prior selloff. The question is whether this is a -14% correction on a fundamentally sound de-risking strategy (a buying opportunity) or a re-rating of expectations (a fair repricing). The next 2–3 quarters will tell.
The Bull-Bear Ledger
20 GW milestone achieved—largest & fastest renewable developer in India
Strong execution pace: 4.3 GW in Q1, battery 1.9 GW on track for 10+ GW-hour FY27
Exceptional margins: 89.9% OPM; power supply claimed at 94%; shows pricing power & operational efficiency
De-risking locks predictable returns & eliminates merchant volatility—rational for a ₹42k Cr capex cycle
Run-rate EBITDA ₹21k Cr by FY27 end (vs ₹17k Cr current) = 23.6% step-up; battery contribution ramps
50 GW by 2030 target on pace; transmission relief (Sep 2026) is near-term catalyst for curtailment relief
AESL 25-year contracts lock in ₹2.7–3.5/kWh; if long-term rates rise, AGEL upside is capped—no price reset clauses
Merchant capacity conversion is strategic retreat; sacrifices optionality for stability
Power supply +29% revenue claim unverified; consolidated +16.6% may understate power supply strength but shows battery dilution
Transmission delay risk: 7 GW evacuation by Sep 2026 could slip; further curtailment (5–7% EBITDA impact) would defer capacity monetization
Battery supply chain risk: ₹1.5 Cr/MW-hr thumb rule is sensitive to rupee/dollar rates; commissioning unpredictable; management withheld quarterly phasing
Rooftop solar ramping ~12 GW annually; could displace utility-scale demand or compress long-term PPA tariffs below ₹2.7–3.5 assumption
Market voted with feet: −6.28% day 1, −14.45% from ATH; FII trimming (down 48bp QoQ) signals institutional skepticism on de-risking
Risks, Ranked by How Much They Should Concern a Holder
De-risking upside cap
Medium-HighAESL contracts fix power prices for 25 years at benchmark rates. If long-term market rates exceed ₹2.7–3.5/kWh (plausible under strong demand growth), AGEL upside is contractually frozen. No price reset clauses. This is the core bull-bear debate: growth with downside protection vs. growth without ceiling.
Transmission evacuation delay
Medium7 GW capacity is promised by Sep 2026; balance by Q2 FY28. If delayed, curtailment (currently 5–7% EBITDA impact) persists longer, deferring capacity monetization and extending downside. Khavda 10+ GW ramp depends on timely transmission.
Battery supply chain & cost inflation
Medium₹1.5 Cr/MW-hr thumb rule is sensitive to rupee/dollar exchange (dollar-denominated OEM costs). New technology in India; commissioning delays or cost overruns plausible. 10+ GW-hour FY27 target would represent ₹15,000+ Cr capex; any slip impacts EBITDA timeline.
Battery EBITDA realization uncertain
MediumManagement assumes ₹25–30 lakh per MW-hour EBITDA via arbitrage (buy ₹2.5, sell ₹4–5). But cycles/utilization not proven at scale; management withheld quarterly phasing, citing stabilization variability. Actual EBITDA could fall short of ₹21k Cr guidance.
Rooftop solar displacement threat
Low-MediumRooftop installations ~12 GW/year (8 GW in FY26, 4–5 GW in Q1). If acceleration continues, could displace utility-scale demand or compress PPA tariffs. Management dismissed threat (day/night demand skew), but long-term risk to tariff realization.
Earnings quality / margin claim mismatch
Low-MediumPower supply EBITDA claimed at 94% margin; consolidated OPM 89.9%. Battery dilution is normal, but accuracy of power supply claims matters for investor confidence. Management's selectivity on AESL pricing details suggests some confidence hedging.
Management transparency on AESL terms
LowManagement disclosed benchmark rate framework (IEX historical averages) but would not specify exact ₹/kWh for solar/wind/battery. Light on AESL termination/price-reset specifics. Investors want full terms; selective disclosure erodes confidence.
The Debate
What to Watch Next
1 · September 2026: Transmission evacuation timeline
7 GW capacity expected online by end of calendar year. If delivered, curtailment relief begins (5–7% EBITDA headwind lifts). If delayed, further downside. This is the most concrete near-term catalyst.
2 · FY27 end (March 2027): Run-rate EBITDA ₹21k Cr realization
Management guides ₹21k Cr run-rate EBITDA by year-end (vs ₹17k Cr current). This assumes 10+ GW-hour battery online, capex ₹42k Cr deployed, and AESL contracts performing. If EBITDA ramp materializes, the de-risking thesis holds. If it misses, market skepticism is justified.
3 · Q2/Q3 FY27 (Oct-Dec 2026): Battery EBITDA contribution visibility
Management withheld quarterly phasing due to commissioning/stabilization risk. If battery EBITDA begins showing in quarterly results (₹25–30 lakh per MW-hour assumed), it validates the ₹21k Cr run-rate target and investor confidence rebounds. Lack of visible contribution would raise questions.
4 · AESL contract pricing transparency
Investors want to see actual ₹/kWh realization on solar/wind/battery, not just benchmark framework. If AGEL begins disclosing segment-wise AESL revenue and margin separately, trust in the de-risking terms improves.
The Number to Track
Run-rate EBITDA by FY27 end: ₹21,000 crore (vs ₹17,000 crore current). This is management's own north star. If AGEL delivers a 23.6% step-up in EBITDA run-rate by March 2027—validated by de-risking (AESL contracts holding), battery deployment (10+ GW-hour), and transmission relief (7 GW online)—then the quarter's fundamental story is solid, and the 14% drawdown is noise. If EBITDA misses ₹21k Cr, the market's skepticism is justified and the stock could test lower. Watch both the absolute EBITDA (reported annually) and the quarterly momentum (AESL + battery mix-in) to validate the glide path.
Adani Green's Q1 FY27 is a study in execution excellence paired with strategic constraint. The company delivered 20 GW capacity, battery deployment at scale, strong margins, and capex discipline. But the de-risking pivot—locking 25-year fixed-price contracts with AESL—reframed the investment thesis from merchant upside to contractual predictability. The market has voted: -6.28% day 1, -14.45% from all-time high, FII trimming. This is not panic; it is repricing. The next six months are critical: transmission relief (Sep 2026) and EBITDA ramp (FY27 end) will either vindicate the de-risking strategy or confirm investor skepticism. The stock is not a sell on fundamentals alone, but it is no longer a buyunconditionally—it depends on whether you believe in locked-in returns or whether you needed the upside option.
Adani Green Q1: consol PAT +19% YoY to ₹983 Cr, record EBITDA as capacity hits 20.1 GW
PAT +19.3% YoY · revenue +16.6% · margins expanding
₹4,431 Cr
+16.6% YoY
₹983 Cr
+19.3% YoY
21.08%
+0.5pp YoY
₹5.05
Adani Green Energy opened FY27 with consolidated net profit of ₹983 Cr, up 19.3% YoY (Q1FY26 ₹824 Cr) on revenue from operations of ₹4,431 Cr, up 16.6% YoY — profit growing a touch faster than the topline, so consolidated net margin nudged up to ~21% from ~20.6% a year ago. This is genuine, capacity-led growth rather than a one-off: exceptional items were immaterial on both sides (₹2 Cr prepayment charge this quarter vs a ₹17 Cr project write-off in Q1FY26), so adjusted PAT growth of ~17% tracks the reported figure. The eye-catching +91% QoQ profit jump is largely a low-base effect — Q4FY26's ₹514 Cr carried a ₹108 Cr exceptional hit and heavier tax — and should be read as supporting detail, not the headline.
Q1 FY-2027 vs prior quarters
The driver is scale. Operational capacity rose 27% YoY to 20,142 MW (4,327 MW of greenfield added over the year, 848 MW in the quarter), lifting energy sales 30% YoY to 13,657 mn units and power-supply revenue 29% YoY to ₹4,280 Cr. Management flags record quarterly EBITDA from power supply of ₹4,122 Cr (+33% YoY) at a 94% margin, with O&M efficiency and higher plant availability cited as margin support. The storage build-out is the strategic story: 1,972 MWh of BESS commissioned at Khavda this quarter takes installed storage to 3,551 MWh, keeping the company on the path to its >10,000 MWh FY27 target and 50 GWh-by-2030 ambition.
The stock went into the print at ₹1,501.1, down 3.1% over the past month of trading.
For context: this is the highest quarterly PAT in the last 6 quarters on our records; PAT has now risen for 2 consecutive quarters; revenue is at a 6-quarter high.
Management guides for 4.5-5 GW of renewable capacity and over 10 GWh of battery storage addition in FY27, with a total capex of approximately INR 40-42k crores. They expect to recover the INR 1,300-1,500 crore EBITDA impact from FY26 by reducing curtailment through BESS deployment and securing long-term PPAs for new ca
— This quarter: met
Against its own prior-call guidance (4.5–5 GW renewable plus >10 GWh BESS in FY27, ₹40–42k Cr capex, and recovery of the ₹1,300–1,500 Cr FY26 curtailment/EBITDA drag via BESS and long-term PPAs), the quarter is on-track: capacity, storage and generation are all building as promised, though the ₹40k-plus capex programme shows up as consolidated finance costs of ₹2,001 Cr (+31% YoY), the main claim on the growing EBITDA. No formal street consensus for this specific print was available at publication. One caveat for readers who see the other number: the standalone entity — effectively the EPC/equipment-trading holdco — posted a ₹51 Cr net loss on ₹6,206 Cr of (largely intra-group) revenue; that divergence from the profitable consolidated result is structural to AGEL's holding architecture, not a sign of operating weakness. The board also approved Poly Singh Arora as Chief People Officer, and the DOJ/SEC matter against certain directors (not the company) is moving toward settlement/dismissal with no financial impact recognised.
W1
BESS build toward the >10,000 MWh FY27 target (3,551 MWh installed now) and the ₹1,300–1,500 Cr EBITDA-drag recovery management guided
W2
Capacity additions vs 4.5–5 GW FY27 guidance — only 848 MW added in Q1, so H2 must carry the run-rate
W3
Consolidated finance costs (₹2,001 Cr, +31% YoY) vs EBITDA growth as the ₹40–42k Cr capex programme draws down — watch interest coverage
Consolidated primary. Exceptional items negligible: ₹2 Cr prepayment cost this qtr vs ₹17 Cr PY-Q1 write-off. Consol PBT₹1,188 Cr − tax₹263 Cr = ₹925 Cr + ₹58 Cr associate/JV share = ₹983 Cr period profit; of which ₹845 Cr to parent, ₹138 Cr NCI. Standalone (holdco EPC/equipment-trading) is a ₹51 Cr loss with nil exceptional this qtr (₹165 Cr impairment sat in Q4FY26). US DOJ/SEC director matter pending, no P&L impact; conclusion unmodified.