Please note this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Sudhanshu Bansal from JM Financial. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thank you, Sudhanshu. Good afternoon, everybody. On behalf of JM Financial, I welcome you all to the Q1 FY 2026 earnings call of Inox Wind and Inox Green Energy Services. For today's call, we have with us the leadership team of both the companies led by Mr. Devansh Jain, Executive Director, Inox GFL Group; Mr. Kailash Tarachandani, Group CEO, Inox GFL Renewables Business; Mr. Akhil Jindal, Group CFO, Inox GFL Group; Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, CEO, Inox Wind; Mr. S.K. Madhusudhana, CEO, Inox Wind; and other senior management of both companies. I will now hand over the call to the management for their initial remarks, after which we will open the floor for Q&A session. Thank you so much, sirs, for your kind presence and giving us the opportunity to close the call. With this, I would like to hand over the call to Anshuman for taking the call forward. Over to you, Anshuman. Thank you. Thanks, Sudhanshu. We'll first have the briefing from Mr. Kailash Tarachandani, the CEO of Renewables Business, and then we'll move on to a briefing from Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal on Inox Wind. Then, followed by Inox Wind, we'll have a short brief on the development in Inox Green by Mr. S. K. Mathusudhana. And finally, to give you an overview on what we've been doing across the group, we have Mr. Devansh Jain to brief you all about it, after which we'll open the floor for the question-and-answer session. Sir, over to you for your briefing. Thanks. Thanks, Anshuman. Thanks, Sudhanshu. Good evening, everyone, and thank you for joining today's conference call. As you will appreciate, the company was under publicity restriction owing to the right issue at the time of Q4 FY 2025 and Q1 FY2026 result announcement. The right issue has been a phenomenal success with one of the highest over-subscription recent times at 2.13x. We sincerely thank all our shareholders for reposing their faith and confidence in the company and its growth prospects. The company's balance sheet and net cash position have been further fortified with the fundraise. Also, the promoters, having fully subscribed, their entitlement of around INR 560 crores showcases their commitment and confidence in the company. The entire NCRPS on the balance sheet now stands eliminated post the merger of IWEL and IWL and the promoters' participation in the right issue. We have kept a single investor call for both Inox Wind and Inox Green this time around and will begin with a brief from both the CEOs and our Executive Director, followed by Q&A. As you all are aware, we are hosting this call after a period of six months, and during this time, we have witnessed multiple developments in the company and the industry, delivering one of the strongest operational and financial performances in our history in FY 2025, best-ever PAT delivered in Q4, operationalization of our new metal plant and transformer manufacturing unit, deployment of our own cranes, Inox Green moving into solar O&M, completion of the merger and rights issues, amongst others. On the macro front, the recently notified ALMM for wind as well as wind component is a huge positive for domestic players like us. Further, just yesterday, the CERC notified the amendment to its connectivity and GNA regulation for interstate transmission system, allowing hybridization of existing solar and wind transmission projects having capacity upwards of 50 megawatts. To brief you on the development in Inox Wind and the industry, I would now like to hand over the floor to Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, CEO of the company, for his remarks. Thank you. Thanks, Kailash. It's a pleasure to interact with our esteemed investors and analysts through this call. I'm delighted to be leading Inox Wind, the wind manufacturing arm of INOXGFL Group. I'll first brief you on our financial achievements during the quarter before informing you about our other key developments and future roadmap. We are pleased to inform you that we have been able to deliver yet another quarter of strong results in Q1 FY 2026, despite Q1 being seasonally a weak quarter for our wind industry. Typically, for the wind industry, including our own company, H1 is 30% to 35% of our annual execution. Having commenced FY 2026 on a strong note, we are very confident of achieving our execution guidance for FY 2026 of 1.2 GW, which is 200 MW. I will briefly take you through some of the key details of our financial performance for Q1 FY 2026. On consolidated basis, Inox Wind has reported a revenue of INR 863 crores, which is an increase of 32% YOY basis. EBITDA of INR 220 crores, an increase of 39% on YOY basis. PAT of INR 97 crores, again an increase of 134% YOY basis. Cash profit of INR 186 crores, again an increase of 168%. We executed 146 MW during this quarter. We have a very well-diversified order book of 3.1 GW, comprising of multi-plants across the spectrum, and a healthy mix of turnkey and equipment supply contracts. Our endeavor over the past year has been to build on our existing relationship to get more repeated orders, and in case of a new customer, to get our first orders. However, small or large, it may be, as it is important to break through to build a long-term relationship and ensure repeat orders in the future. We expect to gain a fair share out of the opportunities coming in from our existing and potential customers, most of whom have been very ambitious, have very ambitious renewable additional plans. Currently, we have a multi-GW order pipeline and expect to convert a substantial portion into firm orders over the coming months. To achieve our target, both in terms of execution and margins, we are continuously ramping up in the critical areas. We have recently operationalized our new 1,200 MW capacity nacelle manufacturing unit near Ahmedabad, Gujarat. We've also deployed the first few sets of cranes at our project sites and have commenced our transformer manufacturing facility as well, all under Inox Renewable Solutions. We are confident that these initiatives will aid faster execution and deliver higher-than-industry average margins. With that, we are raising our margin guidance to 18%-19% for the full year FY 2026 from 17%-18% earlier. Further, we are strategically expanding our blade manufacturing capacity and are in the process of setting up another facility in the south part of India. This will improve our access to the sites in the respective states of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh. We have recently raised INR 175 crores at Inox Renewable Solutions at a valuation of approximately INR 7,400 crores. Further, the scheme of demerger of substation business from Inox Green and subsequent merger into Inox Renewable Solutions has received no objections from the stock exchanges, and we have filed the scheme in NCLT as well. We expect the approval to happen within the next two to three quarters. On the macro side, the outlook remains strong. I believe the government continues to stand firmly behind the wind industry. This is not just desirable but a necessity, given the threat to replace conventional fossil-fuel-based power with renewable sources. While solar will continue to lead this space, wind will continue to play a significant role in giving its complementary to solar and generation during non-solar hours and in wind role in grid balancing and making efficient usage of the transmission network. There is also some sort of a myth that solar plus BESS will completely replace the conventional power without much role of wind. However, this is not right. This is not a correct understanding, as BESS is only a storage resource and not a generating resource. 15 hours of BESS is still not financially viable, which is why wind role in RTC setup is critical and will remain critical. The recently notified DCR for wind through A11 is a very strong boost for local manufacturing, as bringing in a level playing field between the domestic manufacturers and certain Chinese players who are importing components today. This is a very positive move at the right time, and we believe that India's supply chain is self-sufficient to cater to the incremental demand coming due to this policy. Inox Wind, having a largely domestic supply chain, expects to be a substantial beneficiary of this policy. Finally, just yesterday, the CERC notified the amendment to the connectivity and the GNA regulations for the interstate transmission system, allowing hybridization of existing solar and wind transmission projects with capacity as per 50 MW. This opens up a large opportunity for IRFL, as our project site infrastructure post-hybridization with solar now increases multiple times. I would like to hand it over to S.K. Mathusudhana. CEO of Inox Green, for his remarks. Over to you. Thank you, Sanjeev and Kailash. Good evening, everyone. I'm pleased to inform you that Inox Green has been able to deliver a very strong Q1. I will firstly brief you on our financial achievements during the quarter before moving to other aspects. During Q1 FY2026, standalone Inox Green reported total income of INR 98 crores, up by 79% year-on-year basis. EBITDA of INR 48 crores, up by 61% year-on-year basis. Profit before tax of INR 33 crores, 17.5x times year-on-year basis. Profit after tax of INR 22 crores, up by 4.4x year-on-year basis. Cash PAT of INR 44 crores, up by 140% year-on-year basis. Our EBITDA margin came at around 49% for the quarter, as we have always maintained our other income mainly comprises of value-added services, which we provide to our customers, which are beyond the scope of the services we provide under the contract. During the quarter, the machine availability for the entire portfolio averaged around 95.6%. Inox Green added approximately 1.6 GW peak of solar O&M track to its portfolio in the month of April to May 2025. Our move into solar O&M has been strategic, given that one of our group companies has recently commenced solar module manufacturing and the imminent large-scale opportunities for hybrid RTC-FDRE projects. Our total renewable O&M portfolio stands at approximately 5.1 GW. Additionally, we signed an agreement for the comprehensive O&M of 182 MW of wind projects of one of India's largest diversified conglomerates, JSW Energy. Inox Green is rapidly expanding its portfolio through both organic and inorganic means. On acquisition, we are continuously working with multiple parties on large-scale opportunities. We have made investments in an entity around 2 GW of O&M assets and shall keep on looking for such opportunities to expand our portfolio inorganically as well. Further, we are participating in multi-gigawatt scale wind and solar O&M tenders of IPPs, as many of the large companies have now changed their strategies and are now moving out of captive O&M to outsourcing model, where we believe Inox Green has an edge, given its strong credentials. Finally, with the scheme of demerger of substation business from Inox Green, its subsequent merger into Inox Renewable Solutions receiving no objection from the stock exchanges, we have now filed the scheme in NCLT Ahmedabad. Once the scheme is approved by the NCLT, the gross block of around INR 1,000 crores will be off our balance sheet, and subsequently, the depreciation of approximately INR 50 crores-INR 55 crores annually will be eliminated, thereby increasing the PBT by that amount. It will also lead to significant improvement in the ROE and ROCE of Inox Green. We expect the approval in the next two to three quarters. I will now hand over to our Executive Director, Mr. Devansh Jain, for his remarks, after which we will open the floor for the Q&A. Thank you. Thanks, Madhu. At the outset, I would like to thank all our investors for reposing their faith in Inox Wind time and again. Your support drives our vision to make Inox Wind even stronger in all aspects. While Kalash, Sanjeev, and Mathu have already briefed you all on the recent developments and the outlook for our respective companies, I would like to reiterate that all our past initiatives, as well as all our future actions, are taken with just one goal. It should be beneficial and value-operative for the company in the long run. Our wind business is stronger than ever today, and is ramping up very fast. While we continue to deliver on quarterly basis, our targets and guidance for all our businesses are on an annual basis, and we are staying firm on our execution guidance while increasing our margin guidance, as we have consistently delivered superior margins and are confident of achieving 18%-19% EBITDA margins for the consolidated wind business. While wind manufacturing is on a very solid growth platform built over the years, Inox Green is where I'm extremely bullish on in terms of exponential growth, which should start kicking in from this financial year, as we ramp up our portfolio multiple times from 5 GW currently to about 17 GW over the next two years. While 17 GW will have a mix of both solar and wind assets, wind will form the majority of the pie. As promoters, our motivation is to create and enhance value across our group companies and always be mindful of all our minority shareholders, case in point being the merger of IWEL with IWL. Our IPP arm and the solar manufacturing business under Inox Green are also shaping up very well, and the synergies between Inox Green's businesses with Inox Wind, Inox Green, and Inox Renewable Solutions are quite unique and beneficial for all. Backed by the large capacity targets of Inox Green, we expect further orders for Inox Wind, EPC opportunities for Inox Renewable Solutions, and long-term O&M service opportunities for Inox Green, both across wind and solar. Today, I can proudly say INOXGFL Group is one of the deepest and most integrated energy transition groups in the country, with a presence across wind, solar, EVs, energy storage, and a large IPP play now. Our renewable arm is extremely solid, capitalizing on opportunities and capable to withstand any challenges, regulatory or macro, if they were to come. I believe our group's renewable arm, and particularly Inox Wind, continues to be strongly positioned to capture the mega opportunities which lie ahead of us, and will continue to create enormous value for all our stakeholders. Given that the industry is moving towards round-the-clock RE projects, at Inox GFL Group, we have strongly positioned ourselves to be a one-stop shop for all our customers, offering solutions right from plain vanilla to the most complex projects across wind, solar, gas, infrastructure development, and O&M services. We can now open the floor for Q&A. Thank you very much. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one gen tlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question comes from the line of Anshul Dhakal from Lalkar Securities. Please go ahead. Good evening, gentlemen. First of all, congratulations on the successful completion of the merger of IWEL into IWL and a very successful rights issue. It is also very encouraging to note that the recent demerger of the evacuation business from IGESL into IRSL has seen no objections. And given that our company has experienced so many corporate actions, I have a specific query regarding our subsidiaries, which are Inox Green Energy Services and Inox Renewable Solutions, formerly RESCO. Sir, as I recall, Mr. Jain had mentioned in the past that the management will demerge these two subsidiaries, albeit those proposals were at a nascent stage. So my question is, on a longer-term strategic view, what is the management's stance on the possibility of rationalizing these subsidiaries via demergers into the hands of the IWL shareholders? So Inox Wind Limited shareholders will likely get IGESL and IRSL via demerger. I wanted to know the management's view on this, and what would ideally be the circumstances would this step be considered? Yeah, thank you for firstly recognizing and understanding the achievements of the company so far. As I mentioned to you last time, the attempt was to demerge the participation business and the connectivity and common infrastructure from Inox Green into Inox RESCO, as we call it now, Inox Renewable Solutions Limited. Under that, there would have been an automatic listing of RESCO, and to that extent, the shareholders of Inox Green would be getting the shares of Inox RESCO also. So when we mentioned about the demerger of the businesses, it was demerger of the infrastructure assets and getting into that Inox RESCO, and the RESCO, in turn, will get listed. That's the attempt, and which is what now we have got all the necessary approvals. The NCLT process has started, and we hope that within two to three quarters, this all will be achieved, and the shares could be issued for Inox RESCO also. Sir, I recognize that that is what has been achieved, but more as a strategic question, I want to know, would the management ever consider demerging RESCO and Inox Green Energy Services to the shareholders of IWL at a future date? No, I don't think we can answer that question at this point in time, but clearly, both of them are integral parts of Inox Wind, and for valid reasons, I see no reason why we would be demerging them out of Inox Wind. They both will constitute an integral part and will continue to be owned and held by Inox Wind. And I think from a shareholder's perspective, a shareholder has got now a choice to hold any part of the business. He can hold the O&M business. He can hold the infrastructure business. He can hold the entire value chain together under Inox Wind. So that way, I guess there's no need for any other further corporate action. As management, we have provided enough window for a shareholder to be present where he wants to be, and I think that was the intention of separating these businesses. Noted, sir. Thank you so much, and all the best. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Nidhesh Jain from ICICI Securities. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you so much for taking my question. So my first question is on the execution for Q1 FY 2026. You see that the execution is up only 4%. Was there any reason why there is this low level of execution? And given that the first quarter has been slightly weak, what do we expect for FY 2026? Are we still sticking to our previous guidance? I'm not sure where you got the 4% number from. In megawatt terms, 4%. This quarter on quarter. [audio distortion]. Year on year. Yeah, but effectively, I think how we would look at it is we would always look at it year on year, and I think if we look at it on a year-on-year basis, the numbers are 4%. So this year, Q1, it was 146 MW. Last year, Q1, it was 140 MW. Yeah, hi. So [audio distortion] can you reiterate your question? I'm sorry, we're a little confused. Yeah. So this quarter, in Q1 FY 2026, MW executed was 146 MW. In Q1 FY 2025, execution was 140 MW, which is roughly a 4% increase in the MW execution of WPG. So I just wanted to know, is this execution slightly lower? Again, I think if you broadly understand, we've guided for H1 being about 35%, H2 being about 65%, and I think we've clarified on record we're well on track for full-year guidance. Why numbers seem a little lower, as you would see, is because effectively what we focused on is more execution on the ground, completing complete sets. Because last quarter, if you had noticed Q4 of the previous financial year, we had a mismatch in terms of blades and towers. We've tried to correct all of that over this quarter rather than just supplying turbines for the sake of announcing Megawattage. What we're increasingly focusing on is complete sets, more execution on the ground, and working capital efficiency. That is what is driving the numbers which you talk about to be only 4%, even though EBITDA scaled up much higher and PAT numbers are much higher. So my understanding from what you said is broadly that when you record these MW executions, that is only when the turbine leaves the factory, and then the entire procedure would actually be installing the turbine as well. Is my understanding correct? That's right. But in certain contracts, for example, we get paid in parts by way we can just dispatch nacelles, we can dispatch towers, where we can dispatch blades. And in effect, we had announced it last year as well, where we had a certain amount of incomplete sets. What we've tried to do over this quarter is completely clear up that backlog. And while you speak of a 4% growth in execution, if you would look at our Cash PAT, that's going to be 168%. If you look at our PAT, that's going to be 134%. So I would urge you to look at the financial numbers, then just pure metrics of MW. [audio distortion]. Nidhesh, this is Sanjeev Agarwal. So I said in my statement that we are well poised to achieve our 1.2 GW of planned execution in this year. The strategy was, as Devansh has said, strategy for the quarter one was to complete the incomplete sets which has gone in quarter four. The execution at this point in time, why we say that H1 is lower than H2 is typically we take care of the monsoons. If you see where we are working, these are in the state of Gujarat, typically. The biggest state that we are working, majority in time, is Gujarat. When we go in quarter two, quarter three, we will move to the south part of India. So these climatic conditions also need to be taken care of when you decide your execution. So once again, reiterating that we are well poised for 1.2 GW of our planned execution. Strategically, quarter one, H1 is always weak, and H2 you will see our reinforcement. Yeah, so to that effect, you mentioned that some sets were incomplete in Q4 that were provided that have then been completed in Q1, so when is it reflected in the execution? At what stage do we then include it? Because from what you're saying, it seems like the set was already accounted for in Q4, but it was completed in Q1. No, no, no. So Nidhesh, as per the accounting, we account for nacelle, blade, and tower separately. So once we supply the nacelle part, we recognize our revenue for nacelle. So what Sanjeev and Mr. Devansh is saying is that whenever we supply the component, we recognize our revenue. So in quarter four, we have supplied larger nacelle and tower as compared to blade and tower. In this quarter, we have completed these sets. Hence, our revenue recognition has been done accordingly. And I think this too, your question will be more in terms of execution. So we've got a mix of turnkey and equipment supply. So with respect to equipment supply contracts, monsoon supply is the function of those guys executing on the ground. When it comes down to turnkey, you typically have a two to three-quarter lag from supply to commissioning these assets. Okay. All right. Secondly, the margin this quarter is significantly higher from what we've seen over the last four quarters. Is there something that you would like to call out specifically this quarter, and what kind of margins can we expect for the rest of the year? I think it's clearly guided. Sanjeev has reiterated that. Kailash has reiterated that, and I did reiterate it as well, that we are upping guidances for this financial year to 18%-19%. If we do better, it's good, but we are not I mean, we've already upgraded guidances. If you may recall, even in the last six quarters, we had upgraded guidances almost three to four times. And after two quarters, we further upgraded guidances this time. And we're sticking to 18%-19%. If we do better, good for everybody. If we achieve the numbers we set out to achieve, I mean, I think everyone should be happy with that. Okay. All right. My absolute last question would be in Q1. Do you think that the difference between the consolidated and the standalone revenues is about 100 crores, which is a lot higher than what we have seen for the last three or four quarters? I understand the 50% comes from Inox Green. And so where is the other 50% coming from? What is it specifically this quarter in the revenues that we've seen? Oh, that is coming from Inox Green as well as RESCO. So as you know, Inox Wind Limited has two subsidiaries, RESCO and Inox Green. So numbers are flowing from the Green as well as the RESCO side. So only for FY25, right, when we do this same calculation, then we're getting sort of negative numbers. Obviously, I'm assuming there are some intersegmental revenues, intercompany revenues that are getting negated there. But this time, it's higher revenues. Depends. If it took customer to customers, PSU customers give all the contracts to Inox Wind, which in turn supplied by the RESCO and Inox Green, whereas the private customers give the three different contracts. So it says if you require further details, we are happy to connect you separately. But the differential part is coming from the RESCO as well as Green. If I may just advise for everybody on the call, given that these results were announced more than two and a half weeks ago, for any specific micro queries, it will be better if you all get on calls with our investor relations team because they'll be better prepared. I thought this was more a call where we were giving more qualitative inputs into the future of the sector, the future of the company, rather than getting into micro answers. Because these numbers are out there for the past three weeks. It's not been announced today morning. Yeah, those are my questions. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, in order to ensure that the management is able to answer questions from all participants, please limit your questions to two purposes. For the attempt. The next question is from the line of [Vikas Agarwal] and [audio distortion]. Please go ahead. Hello. Am I audible? Yes, you are. Please go ahead. Yeah. I just want to ask, given the industry segment, what is the growth trajectory going two to three years onwards into wind? And what could be the factor deriving the demand? Is it possible there is a driver beyond the India 500 GW mission? And can we put a figure to it, and how would it shape up? And what are the present challenges we would see, and how are they shaping up? As in, I hope I'm able to get the message through. Yes. Thank you, sir. I think right now, it's a very indow about the industry, and all we can see that is going in full speed. What we see, it should be if I see only wind, 5 GW-6 GW, we see within this year going upwards seven to 8 GW, and eventually, possibly 8 GW-9 GW or maybe 10 GW also. There's a clear vision till 2030 what the country needs to achieve, and we may obviously, target is 90 GW-100 GW by 2030, so it could be 70 GW, could be 80 GW. But we are looking finally at the rate of 8 GW-9 GW, if i have to say, from a broader perspective, from that point of view. From Inox Wind's point of view, we have clearly said we are executing 1.2 GW this year and possibly taking it to 2 GW next year. We'll continue to see. We are, again, as I said, market share, as you said earlier, market share is not the primary concern for us. Overall, we would like to remain as major player and keep this kind of target increases for us. No, I just want to ask, as in everyone is saying about this 500 GW theme, and everyone is looking at it, as in is there something beyond that? As in does it end at the 500 GW target that by FY 2025. [crosstalk]. I'm in India. 500 GW is total. Yeah. If you see from wind, it is 90 GW-100 GW. Yeah. I understand. And it's not stopping at 2030. Obviously, there will be growth beyond 2030 as well in terms of GDP, in terms of power demand. There may be some new sectors also which may scale up. It's the green hydrogen and all. But that is some time away. Let's wait for the targets which we have right now to be achieved, and then we'll probably have more clarity going ahead. I have just one more thing regarding Inox Green. For Inox Green, we maintain that the per MW realization is only INR 8 lakh per MW. And there is a margin we maintain at 45%. So solar is a relatively new segment, and I think in the previous call, we discussed it, but it was said that whenever we launch it, we discuss. So, are we now in a position to discuss what could be the realization per megawatt in solar, and what could be the margin that we are looking at in the solar segment, in the solar O&M segment? I think we have addressed the same question last time as well. So basically, solar project depends on the scale of the project. If it is a 10 MW, if it is a 100 MW, if it is a 500 MW single location, per MW price changes. So it ultimately depends to the margin. So somewhere between the industry is varying between ±15% of the revenue of the solar MW peak. So we actually, since we have a lot of synergies within the group, so we will do much better than that. That is on the solar. And just to give you some clarity on what we achieve in terms of revenues per MW. So broadly for wind, it varies from INR 8 lakh- INR 10 lakh per MW in terms of revenues, and the margins are 45%-50% for us. And for the solar part, broadly, INR 2 lakh rupees per megawatt is the revenue which we have across all the 1.6 GW portfolio with us. And broadly, the margins are at around 20% for this portfolio. Okay. And can I just put in one more question if I may? Yes, please. Yeah. Regarding the wind sector, what is the present challenges? As in whatever reports we read and whatever articles we see, as in they are very negative about the sector. And why is it so? Because we don't see anything negative about it. I mean, we understand the simple logic that offshore is not economically possible, and we see wind as a part of the total pie. So why is the whole thing so negative? Is it any particular development that is pushing back the sector, or are they putting a negative stance on the sector? I'll say this very quickly. I'm not sure where you're reading negative reports, but fundamentally, I think wind is booming. The government is pushing wind more and more. I think the target starts to be north of 15 GW a year. We're probably guiding for 5 GW-6 GW this year, moving up to 7 GW-8 GW, and then 10GW. Last year, we did about 4.5 GW, which was about 140% growth compared to the previous year. 4.5 GW-6 GW should be another 40% growth. So I think fundamentally, I'm not sure where you're reading negative articles. I think on the contrary, it's only positive articles. Second, if you're talking about rest, the entire market is now moving towards RTC projects, where you have wind, solar, hybrid. Battery has become competitive, but from a grid stability perspective, from larger power being fed into the system during non-solar hours, renewables, wind is the cheapest source of power. And to that extent, you'll increasingly see more and more wind going into the grid as battery also kicks into the system, which is becoming increasingly more competitive. So that's what the reality is. Thank you, sir. As for one more thing, in Inox Green, as in whenever the Inox Wind executes a particular project, it gets added to the Inox Green. So when does the revenue start to flow in Inox Green in regard to battery assets? For solar, are you asking about? No, for the wind part. If you can answer for both? So we recognize the revenue right away as per the accounting policies. Cash flow starts from after the warranty period elapses, which is two years. So the payment is made by Inox Wind, as in it's including the cost of the turbine and it's passed on from Inox Wind. Definitely. I think this is a question which you've addressed multiple times. We can have a separate discussion. Okay. Thank you. All right. There are 20 people. Can I have just two questions? Because I think the question was pretty long. So we can have two questions per participant, please. Okay. Sure, sir. The next question comes from the line of Pranjal Maheshwari from Systematix. Please go ahead. Mr. Maheshwari, your line has been unmuted. Please go ahead with your question. As there is no response, we'll move on to the next question. It's from the line of Bhavik Shah from Invexa Capital. Please go ahead. Hello, sir. So my question is, sir, our receivables and inventory days are still quite high. So what is the guidance for, say, FY 2026? At what levels are we comfortable with? So in terms of the revenue and in terms of the guidance which we have already provided earlier, our working capital, net working capital days would be somewhere around 120 odd days, which we continue to maintain. Our debtors and inventory, as we have reiterated, will be declined as we do more and more execution, as our payment terms are like this, that some payment has received on the commissioning of the WTGs. So we are maintaining our guidance of net working capital days of 120 days. Okay. And sir, in Inox Green, when we say we are going to scale it from 5 GW- 17GW, can you share the mix of, say, solar and wind? And also, what portion will be inorganic? Do we have any guidance there? No, Bhavik. We don't give specific guidances, and as we said, wind will be a majority part of that equation, but we will not be spelling that out in more details. Understood. And the last question on order inflows in Inox Wind. What kind of order inflows are we looking in FY 2026? No. As of today, we have 3.1 GW-3.2 GW, which covers broadly our two-year product. We are continuously engaging our customers. Most of our private customers are repeat customers from that point of view. We have also bid at large, I would say, PSUs and tranches. Some of them are expected over the next one to two quarters maximum. So in coming time, you will see certainly announcement as we close the final contracts and get the advances also. Then we'll be announced. So that's the first intent. What is the short term of the PSU? I'm sorry to interrupt. Yes. Bhavik, please come back in the queue for further questions. Yeah. Yeah. Bhavik, so let me complete that statement. Bhavik, this is Sanjeev here. So you said, where are we expanding? I would say we are expanding both horizontally and vertically. And when I say horizontally, I said in my statement, we want to retain our existing customers. Whoever has been our customer keeps on coming back to us based on how we perform for them. So our strategy remains that existing customers should always be there. Whenever they plan, we discuss much in advance. And vertical is to bring in more and more customers. You must have seen our first quarter announcement. We brought First Energy, Thermax Group in our fold. So endeavor remains with existing customers and keep on expanding our portfolio, bringing new customers. Thank you, Bhavik. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Kapil Malhotra from Anand Rathi. Please go ahead. Thank you so much. I just wanted some more clarification on the execution guidelines for the year, though some light has already been put on it. So we did 146 MW. The overall target is. The guidance is 1200 MW. And typically, last two years, what I have seen from the reports is it's a 40 MW-60 MW kind of a split and not kind of 35%-65%. But even if we assume 35%-65%, which means roughly 275 MW to be executed in Q2. I just wanted some kind of guidance that more or less things would be in the similar line. 33% is 400 MW. You made about 250 MW. But broadly, it's about 33%-65%. We are on track for it. Yeah. See, we are on track for what we stated in our initial remarks as well. So 35% is broadly the first of execution guidance out of the 1,200 MW, which we've guided for the full year. And we feel we are on track for it. Anshul, just to add to that, that is not 35%. It is a fixed number. That is ranging from 30%-35%. So ± 2%-±3% can come on a quarter-on-quarter here and there. So as Mr. Sanjeev has reiterated again and again, that we are in line with 1,200 MW of execution, and you will see ramp up in quarter three onwards. Look, I think we've clarified it a number of times. I think over the past two years, we've gone from 100 MW to about 750 MW. And I think we're not fixated about ± 50 MW. So let's not hold that to the letter. I think Sanjeev and Kailash guys have been very, very clear. We are well on track for about 1200 MW. Whether we did 400 MW or we did 380 MW, or whether we did 430 MW, it really doesn't matter. I think we have the supply chain. We have the orders. We have the execution going on on the ground. So I think we are very confident as a company to achieve 1 200 MW over the course of this financial year. All right. Good. Thank you so much. My second question is, I think we've got an overall capacity of 2.5 GW now. Best-case scenario, in case we get more orders in the coming year and the growth is there, assuming the same capacity, I'm sure the capacity itself would get added on. Assuming the same capacity of 2.5 GW, what is the best utilization numbers, utilization percentage numbers that one can expect from the same capacity? So Kapil, this is Sanjeev here. I would not put a percentage there, but I would like to say to all our investors, we have a 3.1 GW of order backlogs to be executed. At this point in time, capacity to execute on our shop floor stands at 2.5 GW. I also said in the statement that our new nacelle plant in Ahmedabad has been commissioned now. We have a transformer factory in Jaipur again commissioned. We are now planning to open up a new factory in the south part of India. I think all these combined capacities would be operational. I mean, we are operating at 100% capacity utilization, and we are looking at more and more avenues to produce and to satisfy our customers in terms of faster execution. I think the goal has been set to beat the industry in terms of how can we move faster and execute it better so that we are being looked at some type of a market leader on the execution. Okay. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Ketan Panchal and Anindra Investor. Please go ahead. Hi, sir. Order book growth trending for 1500 MW. PSUs growth coming to about. Order book growth trending coming. [audio distortion] 90 megawatts, 705 MW [audio distortion] gap, 818 MW [Foreign language] 705 MW [Foreign language] gap, mix [Foreign language] question [Foreign language] 705 MW [Foreign language] Firstly, on your question on the previous year achievements, so let's just not be fixated on the Megawattage in terms of the EBITDA and the PAT achievements. It was much higher than what we had guided. In fact, in terms of EBITDA margins also, what we had started with was around 15-odd%, then gradually moved on to 16%-17% for the full year of FY 2025. And we achieved much higher than that for the full year basis. So as we've been stating, it's not just fixated on the Megawattage numbers. That can change. In fact, if you look at our execution on a year-on-year basis, last year was 376 MW. FY 2026, FY 2025 it was almost double. And our FY 2026 targets almost 66% higher. Then again 66% higher guidance for year FY 2027 as well. So we are moving at a very rapid pace. A quarter here and there, 50 MW-100 MW here and there can happen. And that's just part and parcel of what we do in our business. What about order book growth, sir? I think we already replied on that. We already have 3.1 GW-3.2 GW. There's one marketing plan. Believe in building up our relations. Sanjeev and I thank you, replied also. These customers keep doing repeat business. We are also growing vertically in terms of finding it's not about arrogance, but finding the right customer who are fully financially capable. They can execute. Many times, the perception of wind is difficult to execute. Why it happens? Because a lot of new RTCs are not able to execute this project. We believe in taking the right partner, right selection, and as I said, we have also bid at quite a few PSUs, so I don't see order booking running here any kind of problem right now. We expect a lot of orders to be announced over the next few months or so. Okay. Now, in light of that, the order book will stay at minimum three gigawatt level for future years as a base. Your voice is not audible. Can you say again? A lot of disturbance. Let me move to the next question. Yes, sir. The next question comes from the line of [audio distortion]. Please go ahead. Hi, sir. So can you talk about the upcoming bid pipeline in MW? And are they SECI or state bids? See, so if you see between April and July, around 12 GW-15 GW of PPAs were signed. So at April, we had around 40 GW of pending PPAs with projects which were already awarded, but PPAs not signed. And that number declined to between 25 GW-30 GW. So what we feel is that this 10 GW, which spans hybrid, some clean vanilla, wind, and solar as well, will come into the fold over the next quarter or so because it takes generally three months for all these developers from the PPA to get their financial closure done, and then they award the contracts to the likes of us. So that is what we believe the pipeline will be. And as we stated, 5 GW-6 GW is what we expect the overall capacity addition to be in terms of wind in this financial year. And just to add, for our customers' clients, I think there's a fair balance between PSUs, C&I market, as well as some of the clients who are doing for SECI project also. So we don't depend only on SECI. There's a few already agreed 10 gigawatt plus kind of pipeline. C&I market is hot in terms of there's still a lot of our clients which are doing C&I. So we don't see that as becoming any sort of bottleneck. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And just one more question. So is there any target O&M company that we are looking to acquire? Sir, obviously, we cannot state that. We cannot state any name. Okay. Okay. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Krish with MLP. Please go ahead. Hi, sir. Thank you for the opportunity. Sir, one quick question. Sir, our full year's guidance for this year is around 1,200 MW. And we have been seeing 35%-65% first half for till now, which implies around 420 MW for the first half. And we have done around 146 MW. So are we on track to do the 275 MW, or how should we think about it considering the heavy monsoon? Just two questions that we address this. Don't be fixated. 35% is what we said, but it's not exact. It ranges from 30%-35%. Okay. And that is generally what the industry also, if you see across the industry, that's the number which is there. And broadly, you'll have to look at the annual guidance which we give. And that will majorly start reflecting from Q2 onwards. Okay. Because the ask rate for the next three quarters, even if Q2, the growth allowed to be as strong as expected, then the ask rate for the last two quarters becomes very high. Yeah. I don't understand this question. I'm hearing probably for the fourth time. I mean, we typically do 33%, 66%, 35%, 65%, 30%, 70%. I don't know what the ado is about 150 MW. Frankly speaking, last financial year, we went from executing 90 MW a quarter to doing over 250 MW a quarter. So frankly speaking, yeah, we're already on a 150 MW run rate at this point in time, which is in the leanest quarter of the year. We already have manufacturing capacity, which is in excess of 400 MW. We are building more blade capacity in South India. We set up a new nacelle plant which is announced in our quarterly results. Frankly, I'm unable to understand what is the ado with 50 MW more or 50MW less. When we are guiding for 1,200MW, we're guiding for 1200 MW. Last year, we guided for 15%. Upgraded it to 16%. Upgraded it to 17%. We ended the year with 21%. Our profitability numbers last year were 25% ahead of what we had guided in the market. So I mean, let me be very clear that I know we are driven by profitability. We are not driven by just mere numbers with no profitability. Our order books are form agreements with contracts in place and advances in place. I mean, if you want to talk about MOUs and LOIs, we have multi-gigawatt MOUs and LOIs sitting in our ecosystem across some of the largest players in India, which we've not announced and spoken of because that is meaningless. And unlike some other players in the market, we don't want to do that. Sorry. Thank you, sir. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Shweta Dikshit with Systematix Group. Please go ahead. Hi. Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity. My one question is only Inox Green. Could you just highlight what has led to the increase in other income that is almost 10x on a YoY basis? What is contributing to this? How do we build this going forward? How do we expect this to change going forward? And this is also. As has been given in their opening remarks that other income is an integral part of the Inox Green revenue, and this comes through the value addition service which is provided to our customers. Furthermore, we have invested in some of the special situation funds, which in turn control 2 GW of the O&M assets through which the income has been recognized here. So as Mr. Mathusudhana has said in their opening statement, currently, we control 2 GW of the O&M assets over and above the portfolio which we have shown. This other income part will continue to be there on quarter-on-quarter basis, and it will remain and will increase on quarter-on-quarter basis going forward. Thank you. If you have any specific questions in terms of the breakup and in terms of the details, you can tell them that. Thank you for the opening remarks. I think that is why I probably missed the point. Apologies for that. Next, the second question is. That's fine. If you need any specific numbers on how this works, I mean, get on a call with our investigation team, and I think they'll take you through how to do the modeling for that. Okay. Thank you. Next question is basically an industry view. When we look at the overall wind capacity addition, we are looking at a decline of 13% on a YoY basis. Industry level, that is 1.6 GW of wind capacity that got added. However, other major players in the segment are recording growth of 60%, while we are at 4% YoY growth in terms of installations. Are we still? I mean, is there any potential market share loss that we're looking at, or everything is stable? Just to restore it, I think we're only at times. I think we need to move beyond megawattage. Yeah, I think we need to focus a little bit on the profitability numbers as well. Our cash PAT is up 168%. Our PAT is up 135%. Our PBT is up 167%. I mean, 6 MW, if we made this 180 MW, which is maybe about the 16% you talked about in the industry. I mean, 13 MW or 14 MW will not make us sexy. I think what makes us sexy is our overall profitability. Us beating guidances for the full year, quarter-on-quarter, I think that is important. I think we did that last year. Yes, we probably missed it by 50 MW-70 MW. But in terms of profitability, we were way higher than what we had guided, both EBITDA and PAT. There's a lot of question of losing market share. Frankly, we're sitting on a 3.2 GW firm order book with advances paid, signed agreements. We sold out for the next two years. How much more? I mean, the longest lead time you get which we've kind of explained multiple times in the past as well. You can't have a three or four-year order book. It's humbug. It's utter rubbish. We don't want to talk about LOIs and MOUs over here. I just said that on my previous question. We have multi-GW LOIs and MOUs sitting in the ecosystem across some of India's largest corporates. That's of no meaning to us because unless it becomes a firm binding agreement with advances in place, there's no point adding it today. No one's going to pay me advances for a project which will come up three years or four years from today. And if someone in the industry is being paid that, then it's utter crap. From our perspective, we had to two years ago, we had taken a lot of PSU orders. We had to move away from PSUs and diversify. We today have at least 12 large IPPs in the ecosystem. We had to move away from turnkey to equipment supply. Today, we're sitting on virtually broadly 50% equipment supply, 50% turnkey. As Kailash mentioned in his remarks, we have currently bid out for multiple PSU projects after a long time. That's because we are diversifying our portfolio back again to more PSUs as a lot of our PSU orders are being commissioned and getting executed in terms of supply. So I think, frankly speaking, taking in orders is a resource issue. Executing, doing 50 MW+ line is frankly, I don't think we should be bothered about that. I think what we should focus on is the larger objective. We're talking of 700 MW going to 1200 MW. We're talking of 1200 MW going to 2 GW. We've just operationalized a new nacelle plant. Why are we operationalizing that if we don't need capacity? We're building a new blade plant in South India because we need a lot of suppliers in South India, and we don't have blades in South India. Logistically, moving it from the north is not just time-consuming. It also costs more money. So I think we need to go beyond just a plain Excel sheet and looking at 4%, 3%, 8%, and if you're so fixated to that, then focus on the 140% growth and 170% growth in actual profitability as well, and I'm saying this. This has been three weeks since our numbers came out. It's not that we've declared our numbers today morning, and you're asking us these questions. Okay. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Ketan Gandhi with Gandhi Securities. Please go ahead. Hi sir. Sir, in opening remark, you said about there is some notification from CERC for can you throw some light on that amendment with respect to the industry, how it would be helpful to the industry and our company? Thank you. Yeah. Sorry. So it just came out yesterday, in which they now allowed the hybridization of the existing transmission infra beyond 50 MW at a particular location. How it helps us as a company is that across all Inox Wind, Green, Inox Renewable Solutions, as well as one of our companies under Inox Green, which is Inox Solar, everyone benefits due to this because a large part of the project infrastructure which we've built is currently evacuating only wind power. Now we can hybridize it, and this gives us multiple times evacuation-ready plug-and-play infra to set up the upcoming projects into that. So the execution then expedites because we don't have to build new infra. Our infra is already there. It's now hybridized. So it's very good. I would say it has been coming. Some of the states had already declared it, the likes of Gujarat and Rajasthan. But now that it has come on a pan-India basis, it helps us expedite the project execution much faster. I think it also just to add, I think it gives us access to almost 10 GW of plug-and-play infrastructure across wind and solar, which is huge. I don't think anybody in India, barring maybe one or two massive PSUs and a large Indian conglomerate, has access to this kind of plug-and-play common infrastructure. So it should be game-changing for us, Kailash. No, I just wanted to add on what Anshuman said, that this is other way also, that there are a lot of solar around projects, and people will look for wind along those lines, so that is another boost for Inox Solar. I think it will be fantastic for us and the whole industry. Thank you and all the best, Devansh. Thank you. I mean, certainly for us, given our common infrastructure, the industry, those who control infrastructure, will certainly benefit out of it. Thank you, sir. The next question comes from Preet Nagersheth with WealthMills Securities. Please go ahead. Two questions. One is with the money that gets raised via the rights, will this result in paring down whatever remainder of the investment? I know the net cash will be filled up someday. So do we plan to use it for that purpose, or what will be the purpose of the money raised? So in terms of the proceeds from the right issue, as mentioned in the document as well, that INR 560 crore spared on the NCRPS belongs to the system, and the balance amount will be which is fully invested by the promoters upfront. Furthermore, the balance amount is used for the paying of the debt. Obviously, that will increase our net cash balance as from the last multiple quarters, we are in net cash position, which will strengthen our net cash position by adding this money. Obviously, we will look out as the other opportunity might be expanding our businesses in terms of backward integration or in terms of the future acquisitions as well. Got it. Okay. Good to know. Regarding Inox Green, the question I had is that there's a mention of 2 GW capacity being added. By when, is this something that we can see it consolidated into the company itself? Is that something at a timeline yet? We have added 2 GW capacity. We invested in a special situation fund which controls 2 GW of the capacity. But in terms of reflecting the same in our P&L, that depending on the usual procedure, which we believe will take around another 6 months-9 months. Okay. So, is it safe to? But the benefit of the same will start reflecting in our P&L statement from this quarter. So irrespective of the fact that whether it will become or not, that will start reflecting in our P&L statement. Got it. Is it safe to say that I remember Devansh a couple of years back had said that Inox Green will be a six-gigawatt company? Really specifically, I'm ignoring these other things right now, towards the end of FY 2026. So this two gigawatt is another already executed organically. We should easily surpass that number by the end of FY 2026. Is that safe for me to say? Yes, sir. We've already exceeded that currently, as we said. We currently have about 6GW of wind, including the 2 GW, and we have broadly about 1.7 GW of solar, so we've broadly already crossed that. Devansh, that's amazing. I mean, so ahead of time. Could you also briefly mention the further scale-up on this? And there could be some multi-GW other bidding around it. Could you share any color on this, any more details? No, we've said I mean, Mathu mentioned that in his opening remarks, and I think we reiterated that in my comments. We're thinking 5 GW- 17 GW over the next two years. When we had IPO'd out, vision was to be a 10 GW company eventually. Happy to say it's been what, two to three years by the end of this year? And then broadly, four and a half years, we'll be up to a 17 GW company. So that's literally 75% higher than whatever vision we had set out with you. As you know, we already have about 5.4 GW in our control.2GW is indirectly controlled by us through the special situation fund. So it is almost 7.5 GW currently.Plus this year's wind execution and next year's wind execution pl us solar execution, plus strategic acquisitions which we're looking at. So I think, yeah, as I said, I think we're extremely bullish on Inox Green, and I believe that's going to be a massive, massive annual cash flow business for Inox Wind and obviously for all the green shareholders. So like you had your point in this, Prit, I mentioned in my opening comments that some of the large conglomerates who are having multi-gigawatt portfolio have strategically changed their position from doing their self-O&M to outsourcing model. So wherein we are actually in discussion and in the bidding phase with those large companies. So sooner we will get some of the chunk, which will add our growth much beyond than that, much faster. Thank you. Amazing. That's truly amazing. Given that both FY 2026 and FY 2028 guidelines of close to 10 GW wind capacity could come much earlier. Wonderful. Thank you and all the best. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Prateek Giri with Shubh Labh Research. Please go ahead. Hello. Am I audible? Yes, sir. Greetings, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity. Devansh, my first question is regarding your guidance to reduce the mix of WTG equipment supply from the current 65%-35% to roughly around 50%-50%. I want to get your perspective on will it not lead to entry of newer EPC players in the sector leading to increase the competition because eventually they would want to backward integrate into turbine manufacturing, which will increase the competitive intensity. If you can throw some light on this, Devansh. No, just to first add on that, and if Devansh something else can further add on that. I think as we continue to ramp up, say from 7,800 MW to 1.2 GW- 2GW now, I think somewhere we have to take the advantage because there's so many SEPs coming and they are also developing. So this is a huge opportunity in terms of equipment supply. And that's how this ratio is changing. To say that I'm reducing our pipeline or reducing our turnkey, it is not. We are continuously moving on that positive direction. We continue to get more and more plug-and-play getting ready. It is only in order to take the advantage of further growth in the sector as we go. Today also, we have huge pipelines in turnkey, and we will continue to do whether it is for our esteemed customer or new customer. And we do a lot of hand-holding with a lot of new customers also which are coming in the sector who possibly didn't know in terms of doing the completely turnkey asset. So it's a mix of that, adding on that. But we are not reducing turnkey. It doesn't mean that we're losing anywhere into the competition, what you just said, that turnkey will continue to do what we are doing today at the rate of whatever 500 MW, 600 MW, 700 MW, whatever is the right opportunity. But beyond that, since equipment supply opportunities are coming in a large way, we continue to capture more and more market share from that. Okay. Let me add also here, Prateek. This is Sanjeev. So I think we are probably the only one left in India who has the specialization to do the complete turnkey EPC. Yeah, from getting the land to commission it and then handing it over the units back to the customer. We do not want to leave that space. This has been built over a period of time with expertise, with in-house expertise. So we will continue to offer these turnkey solutions to all our customers. And when I said we retain our customers is exactly because they love us. They love to see a single company who can take all their pains and only generate funds with the power. So this will remain as it is. It's just that when you want to grow, you need to segregate. You need to expand. And one of our expansion plans is to also look at standalone supply orders. And when I say standalone supply, it is just not equipment supply. We remain with the customer in terms of offering them an expert advice on how to build the plant, how to commission the plant, and how to operate the plant. Yeah. So this percentage would vary depending upon the year, depending on the order values and the percentage margin that we get. But let me make it very clear. We are extremely proud to be in this position as probably the Indian-only EPC supplier in the wind industry. I get that, Sanjeev. Actually, I'll just tell you where I'm coming from because there's one recent entry into the EPC space, wind EPC space, by one of the renowned players from the crane segment. So from there, I was drawing this conclusion, but I totally get your point. This one, follow up on this. I was hearing your question. Investing in wind turbines, so getting that supply chain ready and the working capital costs thousands of INR crores. Putting up a nacelle plant may cost INR 100-200 crores, which is a piece of cake. It's like modules in solar. You have 100 players who put up 100 GW. But that's the least of issues. So setting up a nacelle plant and saying, "I'll make wind turbines, blah, blah," the journey to have a solid technology-backed turbine is minimum four years. And then you need to keep upgrading as we keep taking on better products. And the entire supply chain and the working capital is a couple of thousand INR crores. So some guy with INR 100 crores, INR 200 crores, INR 300 crores just making announcements and talking for the sake of talking is not what will hold true. So let's not get excited about bullshit statements out there. No, I totally get that, Devansh. Actually, I'm sure in these times, you would also agree that capital ultimately is a commodity. But I totally get your point on the technical aspects of it. Just one follow-up on this, Sanjeev, if we can, if this mix is going to change, should we also change the realization for the megawatt mathematics which we have been building or doing it so far, INR 6 crore per MW? Give me your blended number. Prateek, you've given your blended number, so I think that more or less covers everything. Understood. My last point, Devansh, I wanted to put this to you, and please allow me to say this, that we have noticed that shareholder returns become very uncertain when there's a significant equity dilution, which fortunately and unfortunately has happened in Inox Wind's case. So I would sincerely request you to remind your team that minority shareholders are not left high and dry in spite of all good things happening in the sector and in the company, Devansh. Just a point I wanted to put. Prateek, since you specifically mentioned that to me, I think we've been among the best-performing stocks in India over the past five years. We have done everything in the long-term interest of the company. We will continue to do whatever we think is right in the long-term interest of this company. Whether it was merging IWL as promoters, we did not want that to happen. As Inox Wind, we would not want that to happen. So as a group, we've always focused on minority. I am not going to be driven or colored by short-term market aberrations. I'm not driven by the fact someone entered at a higher price, someone entered at a lower price. If you look at our CAGR returns over the past five years, we've probably been in the top 10 or 15 stocks in this country. So frankly speaking, as management, I think our team is doing whatever it takes to deliver numbers, profitability, execution on the ground. And as promoters, entrepreneurs, we are backing them and doing everything which is in the long-term interest of this company. So frankly speaking, I will not hear anything about us not being able to protect minority investor returns. No, I get that, Devansh. That was not the point. It was just that the equity dilution that has happened, the profits generated, which I am very hopeful and I'm very sure which will happen in the future, are coming in the short term. Prateek, we will continue to do that. And again, as I said, what is more important for us is the long-term growth of this company. Certainly. Certainly. Thanks a lot for the opportunity, Devansh. Good luck to the team. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Nandan from Anvil Wealth Management. Please go ahead. Before Nandan begins, will you take that as the last question, please? Yeah, please go ahead. Nandan, your line has been unmuted. Please go ahead with your question. Hello. Okay, sir. Please go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. Hi. Congratulations on a great set of numbers. Just two questions from my end. Number one, I understand that you're sold out for the next two years, which is a great thing. But is there some sort of opportunity loss in terms of loss of customers to a competitor? Second question is in the lines of GST. So there's a lot of news going around about the GST rates in the renewable sector being cut from 12% to 5%. I understand the meeting is going to happen sometime this week. So do we see any sort of tailwinds due to the rate cuts, GST rate cuts? Look, with respect to your first question, with respect to our scouting orders, I think Sanjeev reiterated it multiple times. Kailash reiterated it. I think we are going to go horizontally and vertically where we are building on our existing relationships, and we're diversifying to newer customers. And that's true across NTPC, CESC, Amplus, multiple orders, First Energy, Hero, Continuum, NLC. So that will continue to be the strategy. Some orders, I mean, we cannot be the sole supplier to any one customer. So some orders we take, some competitors take in certain new accounts, customers, existing suppliers lose, and we enter. So I think that's how it is. As I mentioned, we have a very diversified book today of 10, 12 large customers whom we're supplying to. The team continues to work on newer names. So I think we're very, very solid on that. With respect to the GST rate being cut, yes, of course, it's a tailwind because your capital costs will go down. As a result, investment costs will go down. So returns could go higher, or the cost of energy could go lower. Whichever way it is, it benefits the nation. Just one follow-up question on the GST aspect. Will it have any impact from a customer point of view in terms of order inflows, or is it sort of neutral from that point of view? I mean, it will benefit the sector, right? So obviously, it will potentially lead to more investments in the sector. Understood. Thank you. All the best for the next quarter. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this was the last question for today's conference call. I now hand the conference over to the management for their closing comments. I just wanted to end this call by saying two things. I've been hearing, I mean, since our numbers came out about three weeks ago, barring the fact that there may be some micro questions, which obviously most people can get on calls with our teams and get those answers. There were two specific areas which I wanted to just assert and focus on. There were questions around execution and order book. And in execution, as we have stated earlier as well, firstly, we are firm on our annual guidance of 1,200 MW for this year and 2,000 MW for next year. Our profitability numbers have consistently been ahead of what we projected. Over the past six quarters, we had upgraded our guidances 3x-4x. And we have, after two quarters, upgraded our guidances further in this quarter. I think what is important for us is profitability. We are always driven by profitability rather than someone talking about 2%, 3%, 4% here and there in terms of megawattage on a quarterly basis. Annual numbers are what are relevant. Secondly, with respect to the order book, for us, what was most important was to get into the most leading power producers, which was strategic. We have achieved that by having initial orders from leading power producers, both PSU and private, whether it was NTPC, and then we got two or three, three orders from NTPC. In fact, I remember concerns earlier that we were only focused on PSUs two years ago. So then we refocused and spread our funds across some of the largest IPPs, be it CESC, be it Continuum, be it Hero, be it Amplus, be it Gentari, Inox Green, Oyster, NLC. I think what we're doing at this point in time is both horizontal and vertical growth, where we are not just building on the existing relationships, but we continue to enter newer names. First Energy was one. Over the course of the next couple of months, we'll probably have a couple of newer names which our team has been working on and is in final stages of closing out with those guys. Important is to get into one new customer. Once you get in, you keep expanding with those guys. I think just to sum it up, we are very clear on our execution numbers. I think we are very, very solid in terms of the current order book and in terms of the visibility of building on this, plus the fact that we've participated in multiple PSU tenders after a point in time to get back more volume in the PSU market. Thank you, and look forward to connecting with you all in the next quarter. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. On behalf of JM Financial, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.