Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to Clean Max Q2 FY 2027 earnings conference call. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during the conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star then zero on your touch-tone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. On the call we have today, Mr. Kuldeep Jain, Founder and Managing Director, and Mr. Nikunj Ghodawat, CFO. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Kuldeep Jain, Founder and Managing Director of Clean Max. Thank you and over to you, sir. Thank you, everyone, for joining. We are delighted to host this conference call. What we will do is I will present the first section about the highlights for the last quarter as well as the business updates. Starting with the highlights for the quarter itself. Overall, we have now 6.3 GW of RE contracted power sales, out of which, out of the power sales, which is operational, is about 3.6 GW, and another 2.6 GW is contracted and under execution. In the first half of the year, we have commissioned around 600 MW of capacity on the RE power sales segment. In terms of financial highlights, for the first half of the year, as we see here, we had about INR 1,047 crore of EBITDA, vis-à-vis INR 670 crore in the corresponding time period last year, and INR 553 crore EBITDA for the quarter itself versus INR 386 for the corresponding period last year. Overall, we have had in the first half of the year about a 56% EBITDA growth, and I was quite delighted. I was on a CNBC interview prior to this. I did not realize, but it is substantially above the sort of analyst estimates is what they were also informing me. Then the weighted average cost of debt has continued to fall and now stands at about 8.3%. We are delighted to be credit rated as AA/Stable in the last quarter by CRISIL, and that brings us on par with leading industry names such as JSW Energy as well as Adani Green, who are also rated at AA/Stable. Our profit after tax has risen about sixfold of, admittedly, of a low base of about INR 120 crore in the first half of the year from INR 19 crore in the corresponding period of last year. Moving on, as I mentioned, we added 600 MW of capacity, and it is about 80% of our capacity addition are in our four largest markets, which are the four largest industrial powerhouses, which is Gujarat, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu. In this last six months, about 80% of our capacity were in those four geographies. On an overall basis, also those four states account for roughly about two-thirds of our capacity in aggregate. It is reasonably well spread out, and of course, within each state, the capacity addition may be spread across multiple sites, and every power purchase agreement itself will be about 13 MW or thereabouts, so there will be a lot of customer diversification within it. This is a standard table we always present, and I will explain how to read it. There are four buckets to it. First is RE power sales capacity. So the operational capacity here is about, was 1,712 MW as of March 25, had risen to 3,100 MW and is now about 3,600 MW. So, in the last six months, we have added to this number. We have got a healthy contracted yet to be executed capacity. The way I look at it is, if we are adding at 1,500 MW a year, 2,600 MW or thereabouts of capacity represents roughly about 20, 21 months of next growth, right? So we have been successful in continuously ensuring that the pipeline translates into revenues by ensuring that the operational capacity is what is getting ramped up. Then we have an RE services segment, which also has about 830 MW operational. Then we have evacuation received, which means that this is the raw material available for us for future growth. This is about 3,200 MW, was about 1,100 MW 18 months ago, so it is about a three times growth in the past 18 months. Once, just to explain how to read this table, once we have a contracted PPA, the firm evacuation moves into the bucket of firm contracted capacity upstairs. The last bucket is evacuation we have applied for, which is, as of September 30th, stands at about 2,800 MW. Over time, as this mature, it becomes evacuation received, and as customers sign up against it becomes contracted under construction capacity. So we have had a healthy growth across all these four buckets, both the revenue, the contracted under execution, the evacuation received and evacuation applied for. The sum total, which is the aggregate portfolio size, has now risen to about 13,200 MW as of September 30th, 2026, which contrasts with 18 months ago, this was about 7.8 GW, right? So, the increase reflects our confidence in continuing growth in the company. A few financial highlights now for the quarter that just went by. So if you look at revenue from operations, the first half of the year saw roughly 67% growth. We have two business segments. One is RE power sales, which is here, that has also grown, and RE services, which quarter-on-quarter may not have risen too much, but if you look at a first half of the year basis, even the RE power sales has roughly doubled in aggregate revenue. So, handsome revenue growth in both our business segments. Then if you look at the EBITDA as well, and if you look at the first half of the year EBITDA, RE power sales EBITDA segment for the first half, the bottom portion, has risen from INR 620 crore RE power sales to about INR 986 crore. The RE services has also shown a 20% increase from INR 52 crore EBITDA to about INR 61 crore of EBITDA. So, EBITDA strong growth in both segments, and as a result, in the first half of the year, we have had a 56% overall growth in EBITDA. Profit after tax, also up from a small base of INR 19 crore in the first half last year to about INR 120 crore. Key unit economics, we always provide this sort of guidance slide. It is standard numbers. I will only draw your attention to one number, which is I am quite delighted that our capacity under execution, the tariff is still around INR 4, which for a capacity which is 50% solar and 50% wind is industry leading, with low amounts of storage at INR 4 tariff is industry leading. This is because of our premium positioning within the C&I segment, as opposed to if you were to look at this comparable number for a utility player, for 50% wind, 50% solar in SECI contracts, it would be closer to INR 3.1 or thereabouts, whereas ours is closer to INR 4. That tariff premium translates into great unit economics for us. Then we have some more operational assumptions. I will reiterate the guidance we gave at the start of the year, which is minimum 1,500 MW of new capacity addition during the current fiscal. Therefore, we reiterate the two guidances we have given previously, which is at least 1,500 MW of operational capacity we will have, and next fiscal FY 2028, we will have at least a INR 3,000 crore minimum reported EBITDA. On a 5x sort of net debt to EBITDA basis, that would get to a INR 15,000, INR 16,000 crore net debt against this corresponding EBITDA number. Those are the numbers on this page. A bunch of business updates to provide to you. Data and AI continues to be a strong theme for us. I will begin with some numbers, which is it continues to be about 41%, 42% of our overall volumes. We serve a number of key customers across the board. Two more comments people have been asking me, and maybe we can take it as part of the Q&A, but I do see from our vantage point a lot of the compute factories or AI data centers needing to move to India because it is becoming tough to build in other parts of the world. U.S. was tough already. I think the recent midterm elections have made it tougher. Europe is very tough to build these compute factories in quickly. Middle East has geopolitical issues. Given geopolitical issues, these compute factories will not go to China. I think India will see a rise from its current modest 2.3% share of AI data center market or compute factory market. I think they will see a rise, and that will lead to a rise in contracted energy capacities in this country as well. That is my one comment on AI and data centers as a customer base for us. A little more about our clients. The overall numbers we have gone through already. I will not reiterate this. But one thing we always look at is how much of the new PPAs we sign comes from the same existing clients. We just call it a repeat business share in our growth. It has been very handsome at about 75% for the last two financial years. In the first half of this year, this has risen slightly to 85%. I mean, that is always a good thing. Of course, I always tell my business development teams that you need to work harder on getting more new clients because you are just resting on your laurels if you are selling to the existing ones. It is fantastic to have this kind of a strong 600+ base of corporate clients, which caters to our growth. We continue to have low receivable days. They are amongst the best in the industry. Our clientele remains very high caliber, as demonstrated by the fact that 83% of them are credit-rated AA, AAA, and multinationals, and another 12% of them are rated A category. So 95% A-rated or above, 83% AA, AAA, or multinationals. We have a very strong contracting discipline, so we retain a 23-year weighted average PPA tenure. These are very long-term contracts. We manage to do them at a high tariff because of disaggregated nature. We are selling to over 600 customers, and therefore, even the longer term, the tariffs tend to be essentially in the retail market, or retail is the wrong word, but in the direct-to-consumer market, tend to be higher than the wholesale market, which is what really a SECI kind of contracting reflects. We are today building plants in 10 states in India. Seven states are operational. Another three states are contracted and under execution. We spend annually more than INR 10,000 crore of capital expenditure, and therefore, operational excellence in how we build and run our plants is very vital part of our business. I would like to cover that next. Firstly, we have increased just from our RE power sales capacity commission in the last 12 months, a trailing 12 months basis, we are adding capacity at about 1,400 MW a year. When we say that we envision adding about 1,500 MW of capacity, it is something which we have already demonstrated in the trailing 12 months. You have to just believe that we can keep working at that pace. The second thing in any environment is that you have to be able to build the plants within your budgets, because that is a big risk, particularly in a capital-intensive business. As you have seen, this first half of this fiscal also, the plants we have commissioned have come in within budget at about 95% of the budgeted costs, and that is an achievement we are proud of over the last three fiscals also. We come in within 100% of our budgets. The range has been 95%-97%. This is, remember, the war broke out in March, so this is in an environment in the first half of this year when we commissioned the projects, which is very much of a rising commodity prices, rising cost of materials, rising cost of diesel, supply chain uncertainties because of the war. With all of that, we are still building projects within what the board has sanctioned for them. Grid uptime, I have got more details. It has been better on the CTU front, but I will explain more in a subsequent slide. Even STUs continue to have a 98.5%-99% kind of an uptime rate. That is not an issue. If you look at our plant's operating performance in the last 12 months, which is a trailing 12 months to H1 2027 versus a trailing 12 months to H1 2026, the wind power performance has been slightly better, and even the solar plant performance has been slightly better, and the hybrid plant performance has also been slightly better. I think we have made a lot of efforts to continuously build super high-quality power plants and operate them well. It reflects in high quality of operating performance in all of our plants. The Bikaner grid curtailment is something which a lot of you asked about, so we've provided more details. In the first quarter of this year, if you remember our last earnings call, we said it was, the plant had just commissioned and the grid curtailment was 70%. It has fallen in the last quarter, the months of July, August, and September to, July and August was nearly 50%, then it fell to 44%, and as of October, it's fallen to 26%. Basically, the grid has worked hard on upgrading and commissioning some new sections, and as a result, the congestion, which had reached very peak proportions, has really reduced, and we are delighted to see it at a low number of 26% in October. From an EBITDA perspective, if you translate this, in the first half of the year, the grid curtailment cost us about 5% of our EBITDA. In other words, if our EBITDA in H1 of this year grew at 56%, without this curtailment, instead of 56, it could have grown at 61%. Right? But it's not a very big number, and the issue is getting more in control, as you can see with these numbers. I'll now hand over to my able colleague, Nikunj, to take us through the financial results. Thank you. Thank you, Kuldeep. In the financial results section, which is page number 16, this slide, I think on the first table is on the P&L number. Kuldeep has, to some extent, covered this. I'd just like to highlight couple of things here, as numbers already been covered, is that the growth in the EBITDA is primarily driven by strong operating performance of our assets. Which is delivered on generation very well, both wind, solar, and hybrid asset. Also some of the projects which we have commissioned, fast commission in H1, has also contributed to the growth in the revenue and EBITDA for our generation segment. Particularly on the balance sheet front, there are a few components we track very carefully. It's a business where we are consistently adding capacity, so how the gross block movement has been and the working progress or CWIP movement has been. There is a growth in both. They now stand at the gross block at INR 15,182 crore as on September 30th, 2027, and CAP WIP is around INR 6,700 crore. This capital expenditure result correspondingly increase into the net debt, which is on S eptember 30th, 2027, stand at INR 13,838 crore. This capital expenditure is funded by the net debt and the internal accruals in the equity. That is why on the next page, what I will try to cover is the profiling of the net debt and how the different component of debt, page number 19. Just go up a page. This page. The breakup of Sorry. Apologies. We are on page number 17, which is profiling of the net debt. If you see the bottom chart, it just break the net debt into three component, which is the debt against the project which has been operational for more than a year. The outstanding debt against those project is INR 6,074 crore. These assets correspondingly generated in first half around INR 717 crore of EBITDA. We loosely analyze that it is sort of less than 5x of net debt to EBITDA on the asset which are fully operationalized. Right? That is also sort of the net debt to EBITDA number at a balance sheet level as a proxy, which we also monitor. That also remains as in less than 5x. That is a very important component which we monitor. Outside of this, we have INR 5,100 crore of debt, which is against the under construction assets or the debt at a holding company. That pretty much correspondent to the INR 6,700 crore CAP WIP, which we saw on the last page. The net debt buildup reflect the CapEx which we are incurring, and the asset which are fully stabilized are self-servicing from the cash flows which is generating from the asset. That is the important point I wanted to make here. That is why resulted into a very important update for this quarter was upgrade in the credit rating for the Clean Max. We are now rated at a corporate level AA from CRISIL. Also in the last quarter, we did a first green bond of the company, which was also AA rated by the CRISIL, which was a INR 2,500 crore bond. The big benefit of that bond was, which we completed in the month of September, was that it was a fixed rate bond with a different strip starting from two year to 10 year, with a weighted average cost of around 8.6. That is why if you see on the middle bar chart, there are fixed component of the outstanding debt, which is the rate locked in, is 53.7%, and the floating is 46%. It is a very important ratio in current environment because we all know that there is some hardening of interest rate expected over the next few quarters. We already seen some increase in the last quarter by the RBI. So, fixing of the rates significantly help us navigating that increase in the rate, the macro environment rate. Also, last but not the least, the first half interest rate, which is the weighted average interest rate for the company, has also been reduced to now 8.2% at the project level and at the overall corporate level at 8.3%. If you just think about Clean Max, in H1, we've been able to reduce the rate, get the corporate rating upgrade, and also been able to get half the portfolio locked in. In the second half and going forward, the rates are expected to go up. Even if it goes up, let's say by 50 basis points in next six months, hopefully our weighted average rate would just not cross what at the point at which it started the year, because of the various initiative taken in the first half. But yeah, we are growing at the rate of 50% on our capital expenditure and the EBITDA both. We'll have to really create a fine balance. But the important message is that we've been able to have a very good mix of fixed and floating and upgrading rating, which will help us navigate this hardening of the interest rate macro environment. The next is on the operating leverage of the business. As we highlighted in past also, we continue to have the operating leverage on the RE power sales segment reflecting on our overall performance. The EBITDA for this segment is now 84%, which was 83.5% in the March 2026. With the constant gross margin, the increase in EBITDA is just lower SG&A as a percentage of the overall revenue of that segment. That's the operating leverage which we expect to continue as we expand. That's overall is a high-level update we have on the financials. I'm just conscious of the time, and I'd say that we should use the last half an hour to have any questions from you all. If you can just pause here and get into the Q&A. Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question-and-answer session. Participants connected on audio may press star and one on their touchtone phone. If you wish to withdraw yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants connected on webcast may click on the live question tab and use the raise hand option. You may also type in your questions on the ask a question tab. We will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question is from the line of Puneet from HSBC. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you so much, and congratulations on a great second quarter. My first question is on your CTU connectivity. Is there an update on what is the timeline now for Bikaner 2 to become fully functional? Also anything you are hearing on Koppal part? On Koppal, there is no issue on the connectivity. Let me just be clear. They are ready to start any day. In fact, we are quite certain that we will commission our plant in phases, but we will start from December itself. The grid there is ready, and there is no transmission bottlenecks in Koppal. Now, on Bikaner 2, yes, as we saw, the grid has done a lot of work which has improved the extent of the curtailment. We do not really have an update, and please appreciate it is completely outside our control in terms of when the grid will finish building a relevant substation, and there are some lines going into U.P. which are slightly delayed at their end and which is causing this delay in getting a final connectivity. So it is tough to really forecast, honestly. Okay. When you talk about your PLF, is it adjusted for this curtailment, or is it after taking the hit of curtailment? It is after taking the hit on curtailment. Yeah, it is reported PLF. It is reported PLF. Okay. Had the curtailment not been, your PLF would have been much higher as well? Yeah, I do not have the from-to PLF number, Puneet, but as I mentioned earlier, in H1, our EBITDA could have been 5% higher. Instead of 56% growth, we could have reported a 61%. But, again, if you look at that, it is a bit like anyone commissions a major CapEx asset, there is a ramp-up phase. The inverse of that, if you look at curtailment inverse, it is like 30% ramp-up in first quarter, 50% in second quarter, and from October onwards, about 70% ramp-up. It is sort of ramped up. Understood. Also, can you talk about what are you hearing in terms of discussions with large data center guys? You are adding contracts at a decent pace. Should one expect a material pickup, and is there a guidance you can give on how much you commission, how many new contracts you would have signed? We do not give a guidance on customer contract signing, guys, because very difficult for us to predict a precise point in time by which they will contract. A couple of things about our hyperscaler business. Our data and AI business has two parts. First is with colos, right? The likes of NTT, STT, Equinix, Iron Mountain, and we work a lot with them. The second is with the hyperscalers, which is Amazon, Google, Meta, and those kind of customers. Out of 6,200 MW, roughly 27%-28% is with hyperscaler clients. These are typically big and bulky deals. You will not have more than one deal announcement in a year because they tend to be big and bulky. Therefore, it is tough to give a precise date and MW estimate. What I would say is two things. First, the demand and the quantum of client conversations with hyperscalers and with colo data centers is higher than ever before, right? The demand and conversation volume with both hyperscalers and colo data centers is higher than ever before. Second thing, I do think that our clients foresee a lot of compute factory work beginning to move to India because there are bottlenecks in other parts of the world, and that would naturally translate into a lot more demand for clean energy from us. So we do see that as a continued growth driver. Puneet, one sincere apologies on PLF correction. I think it is adjusted for the Bikaner grid curtailment. Correction, please note. Understood. That is very clear. That is all from my side. Thank you so much and all the best. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Apoorva Bahadur from IIFL Capital. Please go ahead. Hi, sir. Thank you for the opportunity. I think in your letter to the shareholders, you have mentioned that you have started signing contracts and placing orders for DCR-compliant or ALMM List-II-compliant solar modules. Can you help us with, A, the quantum that you are signing right now, how you are seeing the phasing out of solar capacity post-December, as well as the pricing which is available right now? Well, I know that we are looking at a small volume of about 100 MW- 150 MW to be bought for Q1 of next calendar year, which is really January to March. But honestly, we will hold off on placing these final orders till I am told by my teams that all the work has been done. But given there is always a possibility of some sort of an extension, and these decisions are typically made at the very fag end, we have held off on that. I do not think it is fair to discuss what pricing our esteemed vendors are offering us. I think that should not really be discussed here. But what I would say from our business perspective, we had always factored in those kind of prices for volumes we are building from next calendar year onwards, and therefore it has no impact on our IRR requirements. So, we have been able to sort of pass through the increase in overall CapEx. Yeah for our future tenders? Yes. Yes. Okay. Secondly, on our tie-up with data centers, I think you provided some color on this, about the co-located ones as well as what we are signing with hyperscalers. But as we see more and more of data center capacity, especially the AI ones being set up in India, they would require round-the-clock supply, right? How are we thinking about this? I know we have done quite well in terms of setting up hybrid capacity, solar and wind. But do we have any intention of setting up large-scale storage capacities or entering into those type of products which offer a much higher reliability of supply? Or tying up with some other vendor with maybe a PSP or helping us sort of firming up the supply which we provide? Sure, Apoorva. First, for the benefit of everyone, let me just highlight that about 1 GW of data center capacity requires about 3 GW of wind power, 3 GW of solar power, and about 2.5 GW-3 GW of energy storage as well, right? That's the sort of requirement it translates into. This then substitutes about 75% of the demand that the data center has in terms of electricity, right? That requires a capital expenditure of about INR 40,000 crore. This is from page eight of our corporate presentation that is there. Therefore, this demand is very, very substantial. Yes, you're right, it does involve some amounts of storage, as you can see here. But the mix will be a lot of wind plus solar plus storage, right? That's the winning combo in our mind, and that's what we see the clients expressing a strong preference for, to deliver the least cost of power to them, right? This is what is being offered. Of course, we could always look at options to this, and clients may also sometimes look at alternative options where they couple it with some storage that they have bought from a PSP. BESS can be at a client site, by us or by the client, or it can be at the power generation site. So there are a lot of options on how to cut this. We, of course, have been offering wind plus solar plus BESS solutions to our clients. We are yet to sign any agreement which incorporates all of this as of now. We are bound by SEBI guidelines to disclose to the world as soon as we sign material agreements. Sure. Once we have signed those agreements, as I said, we will, of course, discuss that. But yes, the activity volume of sales conversations on these is at a record high. Sure, sir. Understood. Very helpful. Lastly, if you can provide some color about our next phase of growth. We have been doing very well. It is quite commendable. I think we have managed to maintain the capacity under contract and under construction at about more than what, 3 GW consistently since the beginning of this year, despite adding about 550 MW in the first half. And we are maintaining the 1.5 GW run -rate as well. But as a size growth, sir, how should we think about the annual run -rate? When should we expect this graduation beyond 1.5 GW to maybe two and beyond? And who exactly would be the incremental customer which you are targeting, especially in STU segment? Because I understand that is a shorter execution cycle segment. Yeah. There are two elements here. Firstly, if you look at this 2,600 MW of contracted yet to be executed capacity, it is about 21 months of growth at a 1,500 MW a year run -rate. Right? So, sort of, if you look at your order book amounts to how much of your growth, it is about 21 months of growth. Now, again, if you flip it between STU and CTU, in STU, you typically contract solar for delivery within nine months and wind for delivery within 15 months, right? So, you will never have a three-year, four-year, five-year backlog in our kind of business. If you have that, what you have is actually an issue of customers feeling that they are not getting the power on time, and there may be issues of LDs or contractual liabilities of not meeting customer commitment. What we have really succeeded in, if you look at these two numbers put together, is, if you look at the last 18 months, the operational capacity has more than doubled from 1,700 MW - 3,600 MW, more than doubled in 18 months, while maintaining a healthy 20 - 24, 20 months or so of order book pipeline at all times. So that is the way I would read the numbers together. And of course, one can always say, "Oh, this should go up," and if it starts going up, it indicates that we will be able to start executing at a faster pace, right? Now, in terms of where the additional demand comes from, I think two segments. One is there will be some growth. We have got a lot of new CTU evacuation capacity and applied for a fair bit as well, as you can see in the bottom half of the page. Once those start contracting up, which are at very late stages right now of closures, when those contract up, that translates into that number growth. The other is, I think the domestic base of STU client base is very diversified across all sorts of sectors and segments. Therefore, there are many, many growth engines, and we are not too stressed about which segment or sector or state that is going to come from. That is the benefit of being in more than 10 states. We are contracting and executing at about 1,100 MW, 1,200 MW a year in the STU plus rooftop segment, which really means 100 different deals every year. It is a very, very diversified base, and therefore, we are not too stressed about that. Understood, sir. Lastly, if I may squeeze in just one more question on CTU connectivity for Koppal. I recollect in the last call, we had discussed that we have been assigned two bays, and the second bay commissions in March 2027. We are generally seeing some delays in transmission projects. How are we placed over there? Are both the bays on time for commissioning? How much would we add capacity on each of the bays? Understood. Yes, you are right. There are two bays. We will commission in the current quarter, which is the October to December quarter. We will commission in one of the bays, that is about 220 MW of total capacity evacuating. We may not commission all of it on the generating side, but the bay will definitely commission. The second one, which we, and to point out, this is a bay, this is not a transmission line. A bay is a limited area within the grid substation. There are no ROW risks within the bay. It is a matter of installing the equipment, right? It is not an ROW uncertainty-driven timeline. It is a matter of within the boundary walls of the grid substation for them to complete the works. In fact, I was there for a site visit about 10 days back. I am informed that it is likely to be done within the month of January itself by the grid. Of course, there may be some delays, but definitely within this fiscal, that should be up and operational. That second bay will have the 300 MW connecting into it. Understood, sir. Thanks a lot. I will get back in the queue. Thank you. The next question is from Thank you, Apoorva. Thank you, sir. The next question is from Sumit Kishore. Please unmute yourself, introduce yourself, and proceed with the question, sir. Hi, I am Sumit Kishore from Axis Capital. My compliments to both Kuldeep and Nikunj on a very strong operating performance in the second quarter and first half of the year. My first question is in relation to your operating cash flow in the first half. The operating cash flow was down about INR -2 billion. It seems that there has been a liquidation of payables, and that seems to have been weighing down operating cash flow and possibly has contributed to the net debt increase also. So, if you could clarify on whether this payable position is. Why has that reduced in number of days? That is the first question. We have paid a vendor, Sumit, that is the honest answer. There were some payables against wind turbine deliveries, which were paid out. It was a bulky amount. The loan was drawn down, the vendor was paid out, and therefore, there was a decline in payables, and there was an increase in debt. Okay. Sumit, I think we have explained this in greater detail on point nine, that why this. There's a on the investor letter. Investor letter question nine [Non-English content] detail [Non-English content] you explain this thing. But you're exactly right. As you suspected, it's because a large vendor payment went out based on a drawdown of loan. Yeah. These are capital creditors, so it just reflect in operating cash flows, but these are actually capital credit. Yeah. That's another important one. Yeah. In terms of, I know this is a lumpy sort of movement, but like your FY 2026, your payable days was quite high, almost 334 days. That payable days has now come down to 134 days. I mean, where should generally be your payable days when we are modeling? That's just a small follow-up. I think the current number is more reflective of what it should be, 135 odd days. Right? Yeah. The model behind it is turbines are a little higher, so 140 odd days. Last year, yeah, we had elongated payable period, but I would say that was one-off. We could manage a better terms from a vendor, but that's not normalized way of thinking. The second question is in relation to your evacuation availability, which stands at 6.1 GW. And therein, I see that you have received for 1 GW CTU and another 2.2 GW CTU applied for. So there seems to be increasing focus on CTU connectivity, connected projects and pipeline. Clearly, you have this AI-related portfolio, data center-related, and which is almost 41%, 42%. But how do customers think about CTU-connected RE projects in light of curtailment issues? And B, if my understanding is right, a bulk of your contracts with these hyperscaler sort of customers was more for the green attribute, or are they going to directly consume this green power? Could you share some perspective around this? For our hyperscaler clients, prefer CTU-connected projects. That's point number one. If you think about hyperscaler client buying attributes or what kind of projects they want, first, they want CTU-connected. Second, they want wind-solar hybrids to have a better time of day as well as through the year kind of match profile. So they don't want just solar, they want wind plus solar hybrids. Third is, they're beginning to prefer CTU-connected wind-solar hybrids in South India, to address both curtailment risks perceived in regions like Kutch and Rajasthan, as well as the fact that a lot of the hyperscalers are setting up their own data centers in South India. That's the zone in which they are preferring, right? So, this is one thing about buyer behavior, and therefore, because all of our CTU-connected capacity till September 2028 is already sold out, we have been applying for more and replenishing our stock of available capacity. In fact, even after this September 30th period, we have further applied for another 2 GW of CTU connectivity. So, there's more addition we have done after that as well. So, that is one part of your question. The second part of your question is in terms of contracting terms. With hyperscalers, we have found all of them seek to retain the flexibility at their sole choice of whether they use it directly as power into a data center or use it for the green attributes, right? They prefer that flexibility at their discretion. The reason is that they are always expanding their data centers, as well as they are always having energy offset attribute requirements. If you are a very large buyer, you are always expanding on all fronts, and these are also contracts where execution may be a couple of years away. It is sensible to retain that flexibility at their discretion, that they could take the power directly into a data center or use it for attribute offset. Since under both models, we as a power generator get the same identical tariff locked in for 20, 25 years, we are indifferent about what our customer chooses to use it for. These are the attributes of how hyperscalers are purchasing the kind of capacity they prefer and the contract flexibility they do require. Okay. Just one question on storage. Do you see Clean Max moving into storage use cases with customers first on CTU-connected projects or the STU-connected customers? We have already begun with our STU-connected customers, and I think it is part of our newsletter as well. I think on question eight, what progress we have made on BESS, we have highlighted that to some extent. Yes, so we have begun. We are building a farm with some amounts of STU, with some amounts of storage. In addition to the customers mentioned here, we have a few contracts with more customers in states like Maharashtra, where this is there. Yes, we do foresee BESS becoming or storage becoming a more important part of our business going forward. Although, to be honest, today, the scale is such that it does not warrant reporting BESS as a separate business line item. The way we say solar and wind as separate items, BESS is not yet big enough to say, "Here is a third." Right? I think that would be when it crosses like a 5% or 10% of the overall P&L kind of threshold, we would start reporting that. Today, it is a blended integrated service. Sure. Thank you, and wish you all the best. Thank you, Sumit. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Varun from Avendus. Please go ahead. Yeah. Good afternoon. Am I audible? Yes. Yes, very much, sir. Hello. Yeah, we are. So if I backwork the number you have given on period ending capacity and execution, I see that we have one close to about 475 MW of new contracts in H1. I wanted to understand whether all these are primarily group captive or STU-based projects. If so, can I get some color on what is the competition like in this space? Who are we competing with, and what is our right to win in these projects? Well, thank you so much for your question. You are right about the number of new contracts signed in the first half of the year. These are largely STU and rooftop solar clients. Honestly, it is an extremely diversified base because electricity is consumed by all. Whether it is office buildings, whether it is bulk material companies, whether it is data centers, whether it is automotive, and so on, electricity is consumed by all. Therefore, it is a very, very diversified pool of customer contracts and offtakes that we do indeed have. I wanted to understand, if I were to look at the same business segment for some of our competitors, I see that for the same group captive purpose, competitors also have CTU-based solutions. I wanted to understand why we prefer the STU-based methodology. What are the pros and cons of both these models? Well, what we find is that in group captive with CTU solutions, they can work for very, very large consumer use cases. These are if you have like smelters, whether an aluminum smelter, steel smelter, those kind of applications with hundreds, with a minimum of 50, but typically hundreds of megawatts of consumption, then it can work. That does happen. In our case, honestly, we have so much demand from hyperscalers for CTU-based projects that we took a business call to reserve almost our limited CTU capacity for hyperscaler clients. Although the same sets of customers do speak to us, we have typically refrained from offering them those, kept that CTU capacity more for our hyperscaler customer base. Yeah. Since you spoke about the hyperscalers business segment, I see that the number of customers we have in this space is in single digits, while in the STU group captive segment, we have hundreds. So the bargaining power of the customer is higher in the CTU case. I wanted to understand, though we have done well last year, if I see the new capacity addition or contracts won in this segment so far, it is not significant. You yourself mentioned that it is bulky, the one or two contracts per year. But even for the future projects that we will win in this segment, what is the right to win for us in this segment from people like Googles and Metas of the world? Especially large competitors are emerging, and they are also vying for the same pie. You are right. Everyone has to compete for business of their customers, right? This is a reality. We are quite proud that today, of the volumes contracted by the hyperscalers in India, about 35% of the aggregate volume. So we have a 35% market share of the so far contracted hyperscaler energy deals in India, right? This is firstly a starting point. Obviously, the names of the hyperscalers are well-known, and for years, everyone has been competing for their business. We are proud also to have multiple deals over multiple years with each of the hyperscalers. So it is also a diversified base. It is not just a market share driven of one or two relationships. It is diversified across multiple different relationships, right? So that is two things we would highlight. Now, on a go-forward basis, what I would highlight is that the ability of anyone to compete is a function also of the kind of volumes that they have in the demand-supply gap in aggregate. So the overall requirements of hyperscaler energy volumes in India are quite high, right? They do prefer wind-solar hybrid projects, often in South India, because some of those hyperscaler data centers are coming up in South India. Therefore, there is- In my view, a lot of demand-supply mismatch, the aggregate requirement is a lot more than the available open access CTU capacity for them. So I do feel everyone will do well, all the suppliers, us and our competitors. All of us will do well given the aggregate demand-supply imbalance. Understood. My final question is on state-level regulations. Though we are present in four key states of Gujarat, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu, the presence in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu is on the lower side compared to the first two. I just wanted to understand if there are any specific state-level regulations and factors which make Gujarat and Karnataka more open for open access and green capital projects vis-à-vis Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. If so, is there a hypothetical risk in the future on regulations in these two states which can hurt our business? So I think your first part of the observation is exactly right, that we do more volumes in Gujarat and Karnataka than in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. That is the numbers which we put up. But it is interesting that what is the cause? In my mind, the cause is that we started many years ago in Gujarat and Karnataka. Like, our first-ever plants were commissioned in Gujarat, I think in 2021, and in Karnataka in 2018. Therefore, we built up a solid customer base over a period of time, coupled with large sites which can take on more and more capacity and supply to the customers. So, in comparison, in Maharashtra, we only, I think, commissioned our first open-access solar and wind power plant in 2025. In FY 2025/2026 was the first time we commissioned. So it is more ramping up in terms of clients and available wind and solar sites. But honestly, I think the potential in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu is equal. It is just that we have had many more years to execute against that potential in Gujarat and Karnataka. So that number difference is just in terms of maturity of our presence in the state and not so much any differences in regulations. Sure. The second part of the question was if there is any hypothetical risk in the regulations in the states of Gujarat and Karnataka that can hamper our business. Even in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu, we are not seeing any hypothetical risk in terms of regulations, honestly. The regulations were brought out by Maharashtra in terms of not allowing daytime solar power to be used in the night, and we had put out a note on the regulatory risk on that as well. Just to recap the analysis for all investors, what we had said is that the trend we do think that no one will allow you to use daytime solar power in the night, the way Maharashtra has also now clarified. Let us analyze the risk to our EBITDA of this being applied by every state retrospectively, right? The risk was and this is different because Maharashtra also said, "Only prospectively we intend to apply this." Most states have said, "Any change in regulation is prospective and not retrospective." But we ran the theoretical analysis of a retrospective application, and the risk to EBITDA was only 2%, right? Of our entire fleet EBITDA till date, you apply it retrospectively. Even that 2% can be addressed because what will you end up in such a situation is that you have power plants built and certain customers who cannot take all that power, and you just end up giving it to someone else. Even that risk can be adequately addressed by selling the power you do have to someone else. The risk in itself is a theoretical maximum of 2%. Understood. Thank you and all the best, sir. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Siddhant from Tusk Investments. Please go ahead. Yeah. Good afternoon, sir. Sir, I have a couple of questions. My first question is on the PLF side. So our blended portfolio PLF, like on average for the last couple of years, has been close to 19%-20%, while when we report the segment-wise PLF under solar, wind, and hybrid, those are a lot higher. Like for solar, it's 25%, wind 30% +, and for hybrid, it's like 40% +. Can you share some guidance, like how to look at the PLF on a portfolio level? Going forward, can we assume a higher PLF in our models? The thing is, you can look at the PLF and capacity either on DC or AC basis. We tend to report our capacities on a DC basis, right? If you're taking the DC capacity, then the AC PLF that is mentioned, suppose the trailing 12 months was 28% for only solar on an AC basis, you have to divide by 1.5 x to look at the DC PLF. That's the arithmetic you have to do. Right. So I was talking about all the AC PLFs. So, like the solar is 25%, the wind 35%, and the hybrid 45%. These are the numbers reported on the PPT. If I take, like our blended portfolio on AC basis is coming to 20%. Why don't we connect you with Raval, and you can take this offline, and we can ensure that you have got the right number in Excel. I feel your frustration that this number should be right so that you can model it right. I get that. But maybe we can take it offline with Raval. You know Raval, our Head of IR, and we can ensure that the models get aligned. Definitely, sir. My second question is regarding the tax. As mentioned earlier, that we do get tax benefit on an accelerated basis from tax accounting. But in H1, I see that we have paid around INR 170 crore of tax. How should we look at this tax? Sure. We should look at it as income tax we have to pay under law. I think the way you need to understand is that assets are at a SPV level. If assets are having the tax depreciation, those are in a different legal entity. That's point number one. We have various assets in different subsidiaries of the company. Second is that holding company is where primarily the cash tax liability occurs, and the subsidiaries has then lot of this deferred tax, right? In consol, when you look at it, the cash tax which holding company is paying, because holding company has investment income from all these investments and also has certain other incomes like EPC and other services it does for the group. Then there is a tax element at the holding company, which is calculated as a standalone basis by the income tax law. If there are incomes coming at the main company, those get taxed. When we underwrite the asset, we take that as a potential outflow and basis that only we underwrite it as part of all this thing. In fact, in one of our investor letter, it is very detailed explained, and I can forward that to you, the entire tax computations for the company. I hope this explains. Okay, sir. Yes, sir. It is much better. Thank you for answering all the questions and wishing everyone a very happy Diwali and all the best. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this will be the last question for today from Meet Bhuva. Please unmute yourself, introduce yourself, and proceed with your questions. Mr. Bhuva, I have unmuted your line. Please proceed. Hello. Am I audible now? Yes. Yeah. Hi. This is Meet Bhuva from Integrity Ventures and Partnerships. I have a couple of questions. First one, like our weighted average tariff has decreased from INR 4.2 to around INR 4.04. Just wanted to understand the reason behind this. Is it the change in the mix of contracts or how? What is the reason? Hello? So- Yeah. See, our business we reported every quarter. Of course, how the mix of solar and wind has been there in that particular quarter on aggregate basis does impact. That's absolutely right. Second is that of the overall portfolio, approximately about 20% of our contracts are dollar denominated. Okay. There is some movement in currency that might impact a little few paisas every quarter. These are the two reasons. Got it. We have the weighted average, so that is a two paisa movement on a weighted average, if you look at it. It was four, it is 3.98 now. Mm-hmm. Another question I have, like we are seeing lot of demands from hyperscalers, data center side, domestic demands as well. The business is in kind of a good traction. Just wanted to understand what, as you are looking at, what are the major risks are there in this business at this point of time, and what risk could come in the future as well? Meet, that's an, you know, what are your business risks is honestly an excellent question, but- Yeah I feel very broad brush a question to answer very well and specifically in this first interaction between us. I would encourage we set up a more detailed chat- Yeah to be able to answer that well. And of course, Yeah since we just were listed in March, we have a very current risk section in our DRHP, which I would encourage you to go through. Yeah. Sure. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Meet. That is it from my side. Thank you. Thank you, Meet. We will be taking some few more questions from the participants. We will take the next question from the line of Vatsal from Ardeko PMS. Please go ahead. Hello? Hi, Vatsal. Yeah. Am I audible, sir? Yes, very much. Please go ahead. Hello? Yeah. Yeah. Thanks for the opportunity. Please go ahead, Vatsal. My first question is, yeah, thanks, sir. Thanks for the opportunity. My first question is, we are increasing the proportion of wind in the portfolio going ahead. How do you see the comparable IRR of wind versus solar at the current juncture? We see them as being equal or better than solar. Okay. The tariffs for wind are quite higher than solar. That is correct. Okay. Got it, sir. The second question is, how do you decide the hybrid and the BESS architecture for a client? How would you look at the BESS on a prop book, and what are the key underlying parameters to evaluate the efficiency there? The architecture of, or the solutioning of energy between wind, solar, and BESS for a client is a function of two things, really. One is, what is the comparison of the client's demand pattern, time of day and time of year demand pattern, versus that of these different energy generation technologies? Second is, what would be the implied price of delivering the solution to the client? Everyone wants more and more renewables, but what's the implied price for that? On the first one, to give you a sense, if you have more of a office building, like a GCC or a tech park in Bangalore, which has 50,000 people working there, you'd need a lot more energy from solar, because most of the work is done during the daytime hours, and so you need more solar. If you have a pure round-the-clock demand, like let's say a data center, it's just pure flat through the day, and night, and so on, then you have power output mix is higher from wind than from solar in those kind of situations. So, there is some amount of architecting that we do based on understanding the customer's power demand. The second part of the solution is, whatever solution you want is going to cost you money and offer you savings, so the client then evaluates that to make a joint decision with us. Okay. Got it, sir. Lastly, what led to the higher depreciation this quarter since our commissioning run -rate was a little bit slower? The higher depreciation is a function of fixed asset base at the start of the quarter. Since last quarter, we commissioned about 500 MW of assets, which were obviously added to our fixed asset base at the start of this quarter. That reflects in the depreciation cost in this quarter. Okay. Got it. That is it from my side. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Nikhil Poptani from Kizuna Wealth. Please go ahead. Yes, sir. Thank you for giving me the opportunity. Sir, my first question is, we have seen our tariffs falling, and we are seeing that our project costs are increasing due to the rise in the repo rates that has happened, which would increase our borrowing costs too. Are our project IRRs or our IC for the project getting affected? The line wasn't perfectly clear, but let me try to rephrase your question, which is that with the likely increase in RBI's repo rates, what is the likely impact on our project IRRs? Right? This is what I understood. Yes, sir. My answer would be as follows, that firstly, we have cushioned the impact of rise in RBI repo rates by having 50%, more than 50% of our borrowings are now fixed rate. That is cushioned because it does not get hit with the impact of RBI's repo rates. As a result, our borrowing cost is today about 8.2%-8.3%, right? This is where our borrowing cost is. Our modeling has always been at about a 8.75%, because honestly, even when we began the year, our overall corporate level borrowing was at 8.8%. Any project we have built in our life, we have always modeled at least a 8.75% cost of interest within it. You're right. We do think our estimate is that our planning is that we should plan for at least 100 basis points increase in the RBI repo rate or the overall borrowing cost, and that will translate based on 50% fixed as a 50 basis points impact on us. 50 basis points impact on us means our project finance goes from 8.2% - 8.7%. It is still within the ballpark of 8.75% that we had always underwritten, and therefore, we do not think from an equity IRR perspective in the long run it really impacts us. That was a great explanation. In a nutshell, even a 100 basis points increase in RBI's repo rate leads us to have the same equity IRR we had always modeled. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. That was great explanation. All of my questions have been answered. Thank you, sir, and all the very best. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, as there are no further questions, I would now like to hand the conference over to the management for closing comments. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thank you so much, everyone, for joining. We are really delighted, and thank you for your time. Happy Diwali to everyone. We hope you have a great new year. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of Clean Max, that concludes this conference. We thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.