Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to Sudeep Pharma Limited Q2 and H1 FY 2027 earnings conference call hosted by 360 ONE Capital Market Private Limited. 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 touchtone phone. Please note this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Rohit. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thanks, Naznin. We thank Sudeep Pharma management for providing us the opportunity to host their 2Q FY 2027 conference call. We have with us Mr. Shanil Bhayani, Whole- Time Director, and Mr. Ketan Vyas, Chief Financial Officer from Sudeep Pharma. I would like to hand over the call now to Shanil, sir, for his opening remarks, post which we will have Q&A session. Thanks, and over to you, sir. Thank you, Rohit, and thank you to the 360 ONE team for hosting today's call. A warm welcome to everyone joining Sudeep Pharma's Q2 and H1 FY 2027 earnings conference call. I trust you have had the opportunity to review our results and investor presentation. I will begin with our operating performance, followed by updates on specialty ingredients, Pharma, Food & Nutrition, and our battery materials business. We are pleased with our performance this quarter. Q2 marked our highest ever quarterly revenue and EBITDA, supported by strong growth in our core business and improvements in both gross margin and EBITDA margin. Revenue from operations reached INR 196 crore, growing 21% year-on-year and 24% sequentially. EBITDA stood at INR 73 crore, up 32% year-on-year. Gross margin improved to 64.7% compared with 62.5% a year ago, while the EBITDA margin increased to 37.2%, an improvement of over 300 basis points. PAT stood at INR 51 crore, growing 11%, reflecting a higher effective blended tax rate together with lower other income. Ketan will explain this in more detail. These results reflect healthy customer demand and improving contribution from higher value products and continued progress in manufacturing efficiencies. The principal operating challenge during the quarter was logistics, particularly elevated sea freight cost. Our selling and distribution expenditure was approximately INR 8 crore above the normal quarterly average, largely because of freight. We absorb these costs without passing them on to our customers to honor our commitments and ensure on-time deliveries. Despite this additional expenditure, we were able to improve our operating margins. Let me now turn to specialty ingredients, where accelerating growth is a key priority for us. Revenue stood at INR 54 crore, up 9% sequentially, although 25% lower year-on-year. Accelerating growth in this segment is a key priority, and our focus is on translating recent customer approvals and contracts into revenue and profitability. Two factors affected the segment's performance this quarter. First, the government of India's fortified rice program, which is a significant contributor to this segment, has temporarily been paused. Procurement typically begins in August or September and contributed to Q2 revenue last year. That contribution was absent this quarter, and we currently do not have visibility on whether the program will restart during this financial year. Second, NSS had a softer quarter with lower revenue and earnings. Despite these factors, we have good visibility into Q3 and Q4 through customer contracts and new approvals. During Q2, we received approvals from large customers across infant nutrition, dietary supplements, and human nutrition, with commercial revenues expected to begin in Q3. These approvals expand our presence with large customers and provide opportunities to build recurring volumes across multiple applications. As these contracts begin contributing, we expect specialty ingredients to return to positive year-over-year growth in Q3 and Q4 and make a stronger contribution to overall profitability. Importantly, this expectation is based on customer contracts and new business alone and does not assume a restart of the fortified rice program. At NSS, we continue to strengthen the project pipeline. NSS has secured five customer approvals and has approximately 12 customer projects at different stages of evaluation and development. We are broadening its customer reach beyond Ireland and increasing sourcing from India, where it improves competitiveness and operating flexibility. Our focus is on converting these projects into regular commercial business, and the progress so far gives us confidence in a stronger FY 2028 for NSS. Across specialty ingredients, the priority is clear: execute the contracts already secured, build the volumes with newly approved customers, and improve the contribution of the business to consolidate growth and profitability. Turning to Pharma, Food & Nutrition, the business delivered an excellent quarter and demand continues to strengthen. Revenue grew 57% year-over-year to INR 142 crore, contributing approximately 72% of consolidated revenue. Segment EBITDA margin increased to approximately 41% from 33% a year ago, while segment EBITDA nearly doubled. Growth was broad-based across India, Africa, APAC, and Europe, supported by our phosphate portfolio, new customer additions, and a growing contribution from higher value ingredients. In India, demand from pharmaceutical customers remained healthy across our core mineral ingredients. Africa and APAC benefited from new customers and opportunities across pharmaceutical applications and food fortification. In Europe, our direct commercial presence is helping convert customer approvals into regular orders and deepen relationships with existing accounts. With our current facilities operating close to optimal utilization, additional capacity is an important next step. It gives us the ability to respond to demand, increase volumes with existing customers, and participate in larger supply opportunities. This is where our greenfield facility at Nandesari becomes particularly important. During the quarter, the facility received FDA approval, marking a significant milestone. With annual capacity of 51,000 tons, it provides substantial headroom across our existing PFN portfolio and newer product categories, including glycinates, gluconates, citrates, and phosphates. The approval strengthens our ability to pursue a larger share of business from major customers who already know our products and capabilities. For these customers, having additional approved capacity gives us the opportunity to bid for larger volumes and take a greater share of the requirements. Customer qualifications are underway, and we expect commercial supplies to begin in H2 FY 2027, with utilization building as these qualifications convert into orders. Within PFN, magnesium Bisglycinate is a product category we are particularly encouraged by. Our AbsorBis range continues to grow strongly. As we mentioned on the previous call, Q1 sales had already exceeded sales for the whole of FY 2026, and the momentum continued in Q2. We see scope for significant sequential growth as customer additions and approvals translate into commercial volumes. Magnesium Bisglycinate builds directly on our expertise in mineral chemistry and our relationships with pharmaceutical, dietary supplement, and nutrition customers. It also supports a higher value product mix, with average realization more than 3x the average of our PFN portfolio. We plan to introduce a dedicated brand, MagSorbis, to strengthen the product visibility with supplement and nutrition customers. The greenfield facility includes dedicated glycine capacity, giving us the manufacturing base to support this opportunity. With growing customer interest, progress in approvals, and additional capacity becoming available, we are optimistic that magnesium Bisglycinate can become one of the top three revenue contributors within PFN over the next two to three years. Our focus will be on building that position through consistent quality, customer relationships, and reliable supply. Finally, let me turn to Sudeep Advanced Materials, our battery materials business. The Dahej project continues to progress, and we remain confident of commencing commercial operations in April 2027. Phase one will have an annual capacity of 25,000 tons of battery-grade iron phosphate, a key precursor in the LFP battery value chain. Our immediate focus remains on project execution, product qualification, and customer readiness, so that commissioning is followed by a steady buildup of commercial supply. Customer engagements and contract discussions continue to advance. We see strong demand to support the first 100,000 ton annual capacity, and we expect to provide a more concrete update on firm binding offtake contracts in Q4. In parallel, customer discussions for the next phase are progressing faster than expected, giving us increasing confidence in our planned expansion towards 200,000 tons of annual capacity. The pace of investment will remain aligned with firm customer commitments and progress in the initial phase. We are developing these relationships across the U.S., Korea, Europe, and India. A customer base across multiple geographies is an important part of our approach as we build long-term partnerships and establish the business. Disciplined capital allocation remains central to this project. We will assess each stage of investment against demand visibility, execution requirements, and the returns we expect to generate. Our objective is to build a business that uses capital efficiently and delivers attractive returns as it scales. We will keep all our stakeholders updated as commissioning progresses and customer agreements reach firm milestones. To conclude, this has been a strong quarter for Sudeep Pharma with record revenue and EBITDA and improved margins. PFN continues to see strengthening demand. New customer contracts give us visibility for a better second half in specialty ingredients. The Nandesari facility provides capacity to deepen customer relationships and scale high-value products, while our battery materials project continues to move towards commercial operations. We remain confident in our business plan and focused on delivering against these opportunities with discipline. Thank you for your continued trust and support. We look forward to sustaining growth and creating long-term value for our shareholders. With that, I will hand over to our CFO, Mr. Ketan Vyas, to take you through the financial performance in more detail. Thank you, Shanil, and good afternoon to everyone. Sudeep Pharma delivered a strong performance in Q2 FY 2027 with our highest-ever quarterly revenue and EBITDA. Let me start with Q2 FY 2027 highlights. Revenue from operations grew 21% year-on-year to INR 196.7 crore, compared with INR 162.7 crore in Q2 FY 2026. Sequentially, revenue grew 24% from INR 158.3 crore in Q1 FY 2027. EBITDA grew 32% year-on-year to INR 73.2 crore, compared with INR 55.5 crore in Q2 FY 2026, and 33% sequentially from INR 54.9 crore in Q1 FY 2027. EBITDA margin was 37.2% compared with 34.1% in Q2 FY 2026 and 34.7% in Q1 FY 2027. The supply chain cost, as Shanil mentioned, remains elevated in Q2 FY 2027 above the normal levels. Our new greenfield plant is capitalized in the current quarter and put to use. With that being operative, expenses related to plant are now getting charged to the P&L. Similarly, certain expenditures on SAM are also part of the P&L. Profit after tax was INR 51.8 crore, compared with INR 46.8 crore in Q2 FY 2026, and up 28% sequentially from INR 40.6 crore in Q1 FY 2027. PAT margin was 26.3%. Year-on-year, PAT growth was lower than EBITDA growth, mainly because of other income, which was lower by INR 6 crore and against INR 10.2 crore in Q2 FY 2026, and our effective tax rate was at 27% compared to about 21% last year. This was mainly due to depreciation increase because of the new assets getting capitalized and the revenue mix contributing from PFN, which has a higher tax rate of 28%, on an average of 28%. By geography, exports accounted for about 65% of revenue and domestic sales for about 35%. Exports grew 24% year-on-year. Moving on to the half-yearly financial performance. Revenue from operations for H1 FY 2027 grew 23% year-on-year to INR 355 crore, compared with INR 287.6 crore in H1 FY 2026. EBITDA grew 29% year-on-year to INR 128.1 crore, compared with INR 99.3 crore in H1 FY 2026, with an EBITDA margin of 36.1% compared with 34.5% in H1 FY 2026. PAT grew 18% year-on-year to INR 92.4 crore, compared with INR 78 crore in H1 FY 2026. H1 FY 2027 delivered PAT margin of 25.22%. At the end of H1 FY 2027, at concern level, cash flow from operation was INR 43.5 crore, up by INR 26 crore on year-on-year basis, driven by higher profitability and stable working capital. On the balance sheet, we remain focused on the working capital discipline and net working capital days remained at 214 days as on September 30th, 2026, similar to the level of March 2026. Considering the geopolitical situation, we strategically stocked up the raw materials of few key raw material like purified phosphoric acid to ensure our finished good demands are met to enough supply of raw material. The inventory also includes a bit of inventory built up on the battery project materials. We remain committed to bringing down our working capital cycle down to about 170 days-180 days, excluding the battery material inventory, and to about 150 days over a longer period of time. Capital expenditure in FY 2027 was about INR 77 crore, mainly towards the battery materials project at Dahej and the completion of the greenfield facility. Net debt was INR 72.5 crore as of September 30th, 2026, with net debt-to-equity ratio of about 0.07x, compared with INR 33.6 crore and 0.04x as of March 31st, 2026. Even as we invest in our growth project, our balance sheet remains conservatively leveraged and gives us flexibility to fund the next phase of growth. Our returns on annualized basis, ROCE for H1 FY 2027 was 22.4% and ROE on annualized basis was 19%. These numbers are because we have deployed our capital to the greenfield facility and SAM, which will start generating revenues in the coming period of time. As this project commenced operations and scale up, we expect ROCE to improve. To conclude, we have delivered a strong first half with healthy growth in revenue and EBITDA. Our focus on high-value product pricing discipline and operational efficiency positions us well to meet our growth objective for FY 2027. With this, I would like to conclude the presentation and open the floor for questions. Thank you. 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 on their touchtone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question is from the line of Sanjesh Jain from ICICI Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah, good afternoon. Thanks for the opportunity. I got a few questions. First, on the specialty chemical. Apart from fortified, how was the like-to-like growth if we adjust for the fortified rice program which got paused? If we remove that, what was the underlying growth? Now that we don't have a visibility for even next couple of quarters for this to come back, what was the contribution of this segment in the second half, and how much of it will be able to compensate from the new order? So what is the growth we are looking in the specialty for the second half? That's the first question. Second question on the margin. Specialty overall margin looks very strong and healthy, but if I look at segmental margin, the specialty margin was 28%, which is significantly lower than last year. The margin in the PFN has gone up very sharply. So why was there so much of divergence in the margin in the two segments? These were my first set of questions. Thank you. Yeah. Good afternoon, Sanjesh Ji. I think to answer both the questions, the first on specialty. So broadly speaking, let's say for the full year, the revenue contribution from the rice program was approximately, say, around 20%-25% of our overall specialty ingredients revenue, right? So if I look at overall performance of last year, roughly INR 40 crore- INR 50 crore. And that was also at a higher realization. I think you do not have volume data. But if I were to break up the segment for you, specialty ingredients, even in Q2, actually has grown in volume, but has not grown or has de-grown from a value perspective because of product mix change. So our capacity utilization, everything continued to improve in other areas, including spray drying encapsulation. Premix business specifically is the one that got impacted. However, as I mentioned, we have very good visibility for non-fortified rice demand for specifically the Premix business for Q3 and Q4, which will largely offset, or I would say almost entirely offset the loss of revenue due to fortified rice, but also additionally contribute to growing this category. So we still remain comfortably confident that Q3, Q4, we should see positive growth contribution from specialty. That's- Second question on the margin profile. I think, again, it was primarily to do with operating leverage. I think our Premix, which was a large contributor, generated limited revenue. Plus, I would say that impact along with the drag from NSS is what kind of depressed the margins in specialty. I would say the business that will come in Q3 and Q4 and the contracts that we have done will probably have a better margin profile than the fortified rice business that we used to do. All in all, Q3, Q4, you should also see margin improvement, at least us going back to the pre-Q2 levels, basically. Or maybe if you look at the last couple of financial years, we should be able to go back to those levels from a margin standpoint. That's quite helpful. On the PFN side, the growth is very strong. I think FDA approval we got very recently. Was this growth largely from the old plant, and how much was it pricing and how much was it volume led? What we basically have done is we have a lot of, I would say, phosphates, which is the largest product category, has grown significantly, I think closer to 70%-80%, if not higher. I think because we have fungible capacities, we have allocated higher capacity to certain product categories. Phosphate was one. Second was the Bisglycinate category, specifically magnesium Bisglycinate. Whatever was the maximum possible capacity we could allocate to magnesium Bisglycinate in our existing setup is what we have produced, and both these product categories have supported the growth in the PFN segment. And with the FDA approval, that would only kind of help aid the growth for the PFN category, not just for the coming two quarters, but on a more mid to long-term basis as well. PFN should continue strength then because demand there continues to remain very strong. And I would say volume growth also actually, again, if I were to give you volume data, I would say around 35% is what the PFN has also grown from a volume perspective. Because I thought the Bisglycinate had a much higher realization. If that has started contributing, that means a lot more realization gain should have come, right? There is a passthrough for phosphate and all. Was there an adverse mix in the base category beyond this for the entire growth to come from the volume side? Because on a year-over-year basis, our revenue has only grown 35%, right? We are telling that entire growth has come in from the volume. Sorry, I was talking about revenue growth for the quarter or the volume growth for the quarter, not on H1 basis. I think on H1 basis also, I would say the volume growth is approximately 19%. I was talking for the quarter only, not for the H1. Okay. PFN revenue growth for this quarter is 31%, right? Year-over-year. We were INR 90 crore last year, we are INR 142 crore this year, correct? Yes. When we say that is like 31% kind of a revenue growth, if we say 35% No, sorry. Sanjesh Jain, sorry, I think there is a. PFN has grown 57% for the quarter. Okay. Let me see. I think there is some problem with my modeling in that case, then let me reconcile. But how is this Bisglycinate now, the reception? Is this more like a commercial supply we have started, or it is still in approval stage we are in Bisglycinate? I would say commercial supplies have started but to select customers, because again, of this lack of capacity. But I would say, let us say, I would not really account for Q3, but starting Q4, we should start seeing a lot more sizable volumes being supplied to Bisglycinate customers in India as well as globally. And we have all the approvals. Now, how many. We said we had two approvals in U.S. Has it increased? The number has gone up? That has gone up. I would say U.S. alone, I think we have maybe eight or nine approvals. I would say globally, if I were to include India, Europe, I would say close to maybe 30, 35 approvals is what we have. Wow! That's good. Last question on battery chemical. Any more progress? We said we added two more final approval. Last quarter, we were at eight. Any improvement in that number as well? Sanjesh Jain, I think coming to battery materials, I would say number of customer approvals continues to increase. I think for us, because we have limited capacity coming live in phase one, and then even the scale-up to 100, what we are largely focused on is how we can scale the partnership with, say, five or seven customers, large customers, the large Korean customers in Korea, Europe, and the U.S., and allocating capacity to them. While number of customer approvals continues to increase, we may not be able to allocate too much of capacity to those new approvals just because the offtakes or the contracts will be for the current 100,000 ton, but they give us visibility beyond the 100, closer to 100,000 ton. That is great. Sanjesh, these are my questions, and thanks patiently answering all those questions, and best of luck for coming quarters, and Happy Diwali in advance. Happy Diwali. Thank you. Thank you. A reminder to all the participants, anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touch-tone telephone. Next question is from the line of Mannathu from Dhamma Capital. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking my question. Congrats on building up the Bisglycinate business to such a scale so fast. My question is regarding how you as the management think about the Bisglycinate business, especially as far as GPM is concerned. How much of the market can we service with our Nandesari capacity at full util? How do you as a management think about how you want the customer base to look like? Are we looking at a concentrated customer base taking up most of our capacities, or are we looking at a much diversified customer base where nobody has a large share? How sticky is the customer base? If you could throw some light on these aspects. Thank you. Hi, Mannathu. Good afternoon. On Bisglycinate, I would say it will be a combination of some customers who will drive significant volume because they also hold significant market share in their respective regions. For example, in the U.S., I mentioned in my last call that globally, the opportunity for the magnesium Bisglycinate ingredient is close to a billion dollars. 40%-45%, so roughly $400 million-$450 million is from the U.S. alone. Within that, you have four, five very large tolling contract manufacturing companies, which produce for most of the customers, and they would probably have 50% of the U.S. demand. We have approvals with two of the largest customers in the U.S. When we start allocating volumes to them, they would probably take up a fair share of the demand. I would say we will not run a highly concentrated book just from a de-risking perspective. I would say maybe 50% of the volume would go to larger customers globally as well as in India, and then the remaining 50% would be kind of diversified with mid to smaller companies. How much of the Nandesari capacity are we comfortable allocating to Bisglycinates? Currently, 40% of our capacity is allocated to other products, which includes Bisglycinate, gluconate, and citrate. The capacity is fairly fungible. Today, we expect out of that 40% majority, at least closer to 70%, 80% will go to Bisglycinate purely just because of the demand and the kind of approvals that we are seeing. A large part, and which is why I mentioned that in the next two or three years, we see not even the larger Bisglycinate, but specifically magnesium Bisglycinate becoming a top three revenue contributor to the PFN segment, right? For us, when I say top three typically, it would be north of INR 100 crore as an ingredient alone. We see a lot of potential in this category. Got it. One last question is, how much higher in percentage terms are we expecting our realizations to be on the Bisglycinates, citrates, and gluconates portfolio when compared to the current PFN blended realizations that we are achieving? I would say, again, it's a combination of how we allocate capacity, but if 70%-80% is Bisglycinate, then as I mentioned, it's typically anywhere between 2x- 3x the average realization, or 2x- 3x higher average realization compared to our current PFN category. However, within PFN also, the remaining 60% capacity in the greenfield will be from enlarging of phosphates, which also have a higher realization than our other carbonates, oxides category. Hard to give you a specific number, but in general, we would expect the Nandesari side to operate at a higher realization compared to our existing site, just because of how the product mix that we are planning to scale from this side. Got it. If needed, can we use the remaining 60% capacity at Nandesari for Bisglycinates, citrates, gluconates as well, or is that capacity not fungible? No, that capacity is currently not fungible. Let's say 50% of the processing which remains the same, there would have to be certain CapEx, not significant, but certain CapEx that would have to be made if we wanted to allocate more capacity to Bisglycinate. Perfect. Thank you so much. That's all from my end. All the best going forward. Thank you, Bharat. Thank you. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. The next question is from the line of Nirali Shah from Ashika Investment Managers. Please go ahead. Yeah. Congratulations and great set of numbers. Just a couple of questions. The first one is, in Q2, so this quarter, our EBITDA margins have improved to 37%+. Just wanted to know, with the phosphoric acid prices increase being passed on, how much of that improvement is sustainable, and should we expect any further benefit from that pass through? Yeah. Hi, Nirali. Good afternoon. I would say, as Ketan mentioned, phosphoric acid has seen a significant upswing in cycle. When we maybe last spoke in Q1, it was up maybe 40% compared to Q4 levels. Currently, it has strengthened further, right? We have done our pass through, keeping in mind the contracts we have done in Q1. Because we had visibility that the market will further strengthen, we basically built up a lot of inventory in Q1, which has catered the business in Q2, and will kind of also support the business in all of October, also November. I think That was helpful. Yeah. I would not say the margins will We are not expecting margins to further strengthen at this level. We would have to see, look at the new contracting cycle before we look at margin improvement. Understood. And the second one, if you could help us understand what differentiates Sudeep's iron phosphate at the product level, how it compares with what other manufacturers are producing, and what makes customers choose Sudeep over them. You mean for battery? Yes. Nirali, as I've alluded to in the past, today, 100% of battery-grade iron phosphate is produced in China, right? Which is close to 5 million tons. We are the first and only company today to produce at scale battery-grade iron phosphate. We have an indigenous tech, which is proprietary. It is green chemistry, is very competitive on OpEx and also it is delivering at par product performance. I would say, having an external supply chain, certain regulatory requirements in the U.S. are driving the change, and us being the first in the industry is what is driving the development of the offtakes. Currently, we do not see anyone close to producing, battery iron phosphate at a commercial level. We would have an 18-24 month head start to anyone else that would start working on this now. Yeah. If I am not wrong, we are the only non-Chinese player, right? Yes. What I am trying to understand is the iron phosphate that we are doing and there are other companies that are working on the sodium portion of it. What is the differential? Which one is better in quality purpose? I think you are comparing LFP, which is lithium iron phosphate, with sodium ion batteries. Perfect. Sodium ion is, I would say, newer to LFP. It has only been put to use at scale recently in China, CATL announced some plans. I am a firm believer that LFP will continue to grow over the next five, seven-year period, especially for energy storage. However, the silver lining for us is, even in sodium ion, they will still need iron phosphate as a precursor. For us, the market becomes even bigger if both the chemistries continue to grow. That is fabulous. That is it. Thank you. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Tanmay from Finterest Capital. Please go ahead. Thank you, sir, for the opportunity and congratulations on good set of numbers. Sir, I have one question regarding our greenfield facility. How do we expect the capacity utilization to ramp up across this financial year and FY 2028? And at maturity, once we reach at maturity levels, so what kind of asset turnover can we expect from this facility? Hi, Tanmay. I would say, typically, in the PFN category, you would expect not a significant ramp-up in year one. Typically, it takes 6- 12 months, as I mentioned before, for customers to approve this facility. Some approvals are already in place, so we would start to see revenue contribution from this side largely in Q4. And then I would say FY 2028, we would typically target, I do not know, maybe closer to a 15%-20% utilization. And then over a three to four-year period is when we would see the significant ramp-up, where we would be at the 75% optimum utilization level. At that level, typically you can expect a close to 3x asset. Okay. And sir, for our battery business, you have already indicated that we have number of customers who have progressed to commercial validations, and we are in discussions with binding offtake agreements. Could you help me distinguish between the volumes that is currently covered by the binding commitments, and then the volumes that are under negotiation? Just trying to understand what proportion of our phase I capacity do we have secured under the offtake agreements. I think, let's say, I will refrain from giving out too many details today. In the next two months or maybe in our next call, we would be at a point where we can very openly share with everyone for what volume our binding agreements are secured. But I would say, let's say, our phase I, which is 25, but beyond that. We have very, very strong visibility for phase I, but also to our 100 KTPA capacities that we are looking to build, and then also from 100 KTPA- 200 KTPA. When we talk, maybe in the next call, we will be able to break it out by customer and what kind of offtakes we have up to 100 KTPA and then beyond 100 KTPA. Right. Okay. Fair enough. Sir, one last question on our Bisglycinate portfolio. If you could give some colors on what was the contribution to the total revenue of PFN revenue? I think maybe product specific breakup we don't typically share. But maybe what I can tell you is, let's say, even today, the contribution in PFN would be insignificant, because of this very limited volume availability. What you will start to see is maybe from Q4, and then Q1 onwards is when you will start to see, I would say, a much larger, 10%, 15%, 20% contribution from this category, once we are able to start producing this at the new greenfield in Nandesari. All right. Okay. Thank you so much, sir, and wishing you and your team a happy Diwali. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. Next question is from the line of Nirali from Unique PMS. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity and congratulations on good set of result. My question is on battery-grade iron phosphate. As you mentioned that you are the only non-Chinese player, how would the pricing work for us? Will we get a premium or there will be a pricing pressure because of this Chinese competition? Some light on that side. Hi, Nirali. Good question. I think, let's say typically, first of all, our goal is not to compete with China. We have positioned Sudeep as an ex-China source, which operates at a slight premium. The premium cannot be 100% because you still have to be competitive and the end customer has to be competitive. But it would largely be at a price higher than China. What is driving this is, we see the U.S. as the main market. The regulation in the U.S. require for the cell manufacture in the U.S. to receive any credit, which is called 45X, wherein they get $35 per kilowatt-hour of cell capacity in the U.S. For them to be eligible for that, they have to use a PFE-compliant, which is a Prohibited Foreign Entity compliant supply chain, where India benefits from that. Basically then the customers are willing to pay a premium to have a PFE-compliant supply chain and then for them to become eligible for the 45X credit. Right. Okay. How will the business matrix look like, say, on EBITDA margin or the return ratios, given that Chinese don't make a lot of margin in this business? I think I will maybe not comment specifically on EBITDA margin, but high level what I can share is, for us, whether the battery business or for any business for it to be investable and for us to put capital behind it has to meet certain requirements. The margin profile in this business will be different to our core business because it's at significant scale. What we look at is delivering similar asset returns and a similar ROCE profile. If a business is able to achieve those two, then it becomes investable and that is what we are targeting in the battery business as well. Okay. So great. Thank you for answering my questions. Thank you, Nirali. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Meet from Niveshaay. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi, [inaudible]. Congratulations on a good set of numbers. Just one question on battery, one, two questions on battery materials. I was talking with two, three our Indian customer. They were saying that Sudeep has a monopoly outside of China. There is no one from whom we can source iron phosphate. They were even at least thinking that on, let's say, in this year or next year, we can even. At least we are thinking that we can make iron phosphate. Can you just tell us that the kind of process that we make from iron phosphate? Is it very difficult to replicate or is there any moat that they will take too much time to develop the process? Process what we think is, it is easy to crack or ours is very unique that a competitor will not be able to match the costing of ours and approval cycle is there that they will require, let us say, one, two years of approval cycle. Is there any moat that suppose if anyone thinks to put iron phosphate, Sudeep will be in a better position as compared to them? Hi, good afternoon, Meet. I think again, great question. Let us say if I have to tell you, iron phosphate 100%, there will be other players in India or maybe globally who will produce battery-grade iron phosphate. I think what will eventually differentiate them from Sudeep or anyone else who is successful in this business is the technology. We have now an 11-year learning curve behind us in producing iron phosphate across Pharma. From 2018 to now, is what we have worked on the battery-grade iron phosphate. Within that, if you look at the Chinese chemistry or what is called the conventional process, it is extremely high in effluent generation. Just to give you idea, per metric ton, the Chinese or the conventional process produces 15,000 liters of effluent per ton. Imagine this at scale at 100,000 tons, 200,000 tons. Now all that effluent, first of all, getting permission in India is close to impossible. The only way you can run this process is if you then set up an MEE plant to evaporate the effluent, then you have to dry the byproduct. That byproduct has a parallel market in China but does not exist in India because it goes into the poultry or the pork industry in China. All of those OPEX advantages which China has, India does not have. The easier thing for someone to do, or probably the only thing that someone can do to move fast is to replicate the conventional chemistry, but then they will reach a scale limitation where beyond 10,000 tons, 15,000 tons would become difficult to produce in India. In our process, which is why we call it green, that we have reduced effluent by 90%, we have reduced solid waste by almost 95%. I would say from an OPEX perspective and CapEx perspective, our process is more competitive. That is what we believe that even at scale we will compete with non-Chinese manufacturers but will give us an advantage. Understood. Let's say suppose if someone wants to follow the same method that we are doing. Purification route of cheaper iron feed. Let's say broadly how much time it can take for a new player? I cannot comment on capabilities of others, but I can tell you it took us four years to develop this process. There are two things they are going to solve for. One is, it has taken us four years to develop this process. Then to get this process validated by customers took two years, or normally would take two years because we have gone through that process since then. The third thing someone has to solve for is also how you look at upstream. We have in purified phosphoric acid, which is a very large cost contributor, or the largest cost contributor for battery-grade iron phosphate. We have been buying this product or the raw material for the past 30 years. We know cycles. We have those long-term contracts in place to support the ramp-up. There are multiple aspects that someone would have to kind of solve for, before they build scale. At a small scale, they would be able to do it. Understood. Just one last question. Let's say our 100,000 initial iron phosphate CapEx is around INR 600 crore. So another 100,000 tons would be brownfield only. Any rough CapEx number that you would like to share if we announce additional CapEx? I think the incremental ROC should be good. Extremely good in another 100,000 tons. Any broad number you can share? You are right. I think that is the expectation when we scale from 100,000 tons- 200,000 tons. I think I will refrain from sharing too much about the CapEx numbers and ROC, especially because you mentioned that you spoke to. There are people who are looking at doing iron phosphate. Right. But jokes apart, I would say, see, we are very focused on maintaining the 3x, let's say at a higher, at 200,000, it could be higher than 3x. I do not want to say a specific number. And the ROC, as I mentioned, if you look at our ROCs, maybe not for FY 2027, but if you look at maybe FY 2026 and earlier, those are the kind of ROCs that we would target with the battery business as well. Understood. Just one last question that two Korean customers we were planning that supposedly they have a capability to be a very large order. Do this require even approval when we start our plant in April 2027, that we need to supply from that plant also, and then we will get approval? Or it does not work like that? If we qualify through our 5,000 tons line, it is sufficient. It fast-tracks the approval. Typically, for the new greenfield in Dahej, let's say it would take typically ideally three months, maximum six months to go through approval. So it would only be a plant approval. The process and product approval would remain the same because they have already approved the current plant or the current product. Understood. Done, boss. Thank you so much. All the best. Thank you. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Gagan from Emkay Global Financial Services. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks for taking my question, sir. My question is regarding this battery material business. Will phase II start only after some binding contracts are signed? Typically, how much is the percentage you have the target or the contract to be signed before the commissioning, sir? Hi, Gagan. Our target today is to be able to sign binding commitments, as I mentioned, in Q4. That would still largely be before we commission our phase I in April 2027. Once those binding commitments are signed, then we would have very clear visibility of the deliveries that they require for each calendar year or each financial year. Then we would base our scale-up or our phase II expansion, phase III expansion based on those plans. We do not have to wait till our phase I is commissioned. A lot of backend engineering design work is something that we are already doing to curtail the time to market. And sir, my second question about the return, sir. You have guided typically 3x asset turnover for this business, although margin is slightly below PFN. What is the EBITDA margin ROC you have assumed typically for the 100 KTPA and might be some different for the 200 KTPA, sir? Gagan, as I have mentioned on this call and in previous calls, currently we do not guide for EBITDA margins in the battery business. What I have mentioned is, yes, we would target a similar asset turn, which is close to 3x, and a similar ROC profile. That is what has made the business investable for us to really put capital behind it. EBITDA levels today is something that we would not openly talk about. Okay, sir. My final question is just to be eligible for getting the 45X U.S. benefit. My sense is that your supply source should also be the non-China. How do you secure the non-China, this purified phosphoric acid at this larger scale of 100 KTPA, 200 KTPA, sir? Yeah. So again, great question. We currently already operate an ex-China supply chain for both our raw materials. We have secured supplies for the first or up to 100,000 tons, largely from India. There are some players who are currently producing it, some that have announced CapEx, some that will be entering this space. Then geographically, there are other markets who are large producers of purified phosphoric acid. You have Morocco, you have Israel, you have Vietnam, you have Mexico. So we have diversity also in terms of how we will solve for 100,000 tons, but as well as 200,000 tons of our requirement. But it will all be ex-China. Yeah. That's from my end, sir. Thanks. Thank you. I'm unable to hear anyone, if someone's asking a question. Shreya, you're not audible. Hello? Am I audible now? Yes. Yeah. Hi, thank you for taking my question, and congratulations for a great set of numbers. My question was more to understand in the next few quarters, what would be the volume of take, and what are some of the new products, like magnesium glycinate, which would have a better pricing? What is the current capacity utilization across all your facilities, and how do you see that evolving over the next two to three quarters? Yeah. Hi, Shreya. I am assuming that you are referring to our current core business, which is PFN and specialty ingredients and not battery. Yes. Our current site in Nandesari for PFN, as I mentioned, for the core product categories, phosphates and all, is operating at optimum utilization. Maybe we would have stressed it slightly higher, so it may be closer to 80% utilization. Our greenfield just received the approval, so it does not have any utilization today. We expect some utilization to start flowing through from Q4. Maybe some small quantities in Q3, but largely from Q4. Specialty ingredients, say, on a full year basis in FY 2026, maybe would have been closer to 40% utilization, 40%-45%. This quarter it has been lower, but we expect to go back to the 40% odd utilization, if not slightly higher to 45%, by Q4 of this year in the specialty ingredient segment. The greenfield, as I mentioned, will take some time. You can expect some growth, 10%-15% utilization from this site in 2028. And then in year two and year three, it will start to ramp up faster once all the approvals are through. Customer approvals are through. Got it. With the USFDA approval coming through, how do you see the volume growth ramp up across these facilities? Like magnesium glycinate, are there any other further certain attractive products in your pipeline? How do you see it evolving in the next two to three quarters? If you could just quantify some of those metrics, it would be really helpful. I think I mentioned that glycinate is one category. You have multiple types of glycinate. Magnesium is one of those, so you have other glycinates. We also spoke about gluconates and citrates and sulfates. Citrates and sulfates specifically, they have been around for a very long time. Some people globally have been producing these categories. Why are we decided to develop these categories is we see clinical nutrition, or basically adult nutrition, as a very large area. Everyone that is on a GLP-1 related diet, so anyone who is a patient for Ozempic or Mounjaro, they typically end up skipping a meal. What they do is protein demand has increased substantially. Along with protein intakes, they need their necessary daily requirement of vitamin and minerals. For that application, these sulfate citrates, which are water-soluble, will see a very large demand. It is built by certain because we are developing these for certain very large customers, and that will also drive demand for these two product categories. We have already received RFPs or customer volume contracts for these categories that you have mentioned? I would not say binding volume contracts, but these are customers that we have been working with for a very long time, maybe 10 years or longer. They are also currently in the development of their products. As their product scales, their demand for Sudeep will also scale. How big can these magnesium glycinate, gluconate, citrate be in maybe next one year or so? How much can they contribute to the total revenue? Like if broadly as a percentage of something. Given everything is normal, obviously there is no supply chain disruption and nothing up and down comes through the normalized state. I think as I mentioned that we see a lot of potential in magnesium glycinate. If I were to give you a three-year view, two to three years, we do see this having at least INR 100 crore, if not higher than INR 100 crore opportunity as a product alone to contribute revenue to Sudeep. That is one number that I can share based on the visibility and the number of customer approvals we have. Collectively, citrate, gluconate combined could be similar, but those would be hard to tell exactly when the scale-up happens because customers are also under the development process. Got it. Thank you so much for taking my question. Thank you, Shreya. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Hoshang from Elios Financial Services. Please go ahead. Hi. I actually had one question. This is regarding, I understand currently, there is a geopolitical situation because of which you need to keep higher amount of inventories. As a result, the working capital cycle has increased year-on-year as well. Just wanted to check, would you be, in the long run, what will be the plan to perhaps reduce it? Do you see any pace in perhaps even reducing the inventory cycle? Hoshang, good afternoon. We are taking multiple steps on inventory, receivables, and payables. Closely monitoring the key inventory levels which we require and where we can do just-in-time part. That being the policy or the philosophy, that should not hamper the business. Where appropriate, decision has to be taken to ramp up the inventory level. Like we had the case now because of the geopolitical situation, we had to do the wrong period purchase. Otherwise, we would have been at much lower inventory level. Also, when we look at our customer mix, we have to be mindful where our key customers are there and at what credit terms we can get the volume business from them. What we will be mindful more is what good customers we have, what appropriate levels of inventory we should be able to maintain. As we said that about 170 odd days, 170 days-180 days is our this year's target. That's the first step that we want to take in managing our working capital. This 170 days, 180 days you're talking about Ex-battery business.. Because there would be investment required, as we are doing our plant set up, there would be materials required for the battery business. So that we are excluding from the calculation, though officially the public results, consolidated results will have those numbers, but this 170 days-180 days would exclude those battery business inventory targets. Okay. This would be excluding battery, roughly INR 180 around FY 2027, right? To reduce. Okay. Understood. That is it. If there is anything, I will join back in the queue. Sure. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Rohit from 360 ONE Capital. Please go ahead. Thanks, and congratulations on strong set of numbers. First, on the NSS front, given that we have secured approvals from five customers, what is the kind of revenue that we are looking for FY 2027, and how is it likely to scale up by FY 2029? Similarly, on the margin profile also, you can talk how the margins will be scaled up from FY 2027 to FY 2029. Thank you. Yeah. Hi, Rohit. So let us say, as I mentioned, I think in the last call also, that NSS will have a flattish year in FY 2027. They will not have any significant growth coming in, but these five customer approvals will largely support the growth in FY 2028 and then also in FY 2029. What we see is that in FY 2028, NSS, let us say, conservatively should grow at a similar pace to what Sudeep, our core business is growing today. So that is the growth that we are currently targeting or envisaging for NSS for FY 2028. Additionally, I would say the change in supply chain that we are doing, optimizing that from India, the target for NSS is to operate close to a 30% EBITDA margin. Largely, barring any additional supply side challenges, shocks that come, but if nothing of that sort happens, then in 2028, we should be able to target that profitability and margin profile for NSS. Perfect. The second question is on our iron phosphate. Once our plant gets commissioned by April next year, how much timeline are we looking at from the commercial scale batches validation from the customers? Given that the domestic customers may not be really ready with their CAM capacities, are we initially looking at the exports market and which geographies? Thank you. Yeah. So I would say for us, the battery business, the 25,000 ton, even maybe the phase 2 that we scale up, and we will maybe talk more specifically about this when we talk in our next quarter, once the bindings are signed, but it will all be largely export driven. I mentioned that we see Korea as a very important market where cathode capacity, LFP capacities already exist. You also have very large cell companies in Korea who have presence in the U.S. So that's one key market that we're targeting. Eventual supply is going to the U.S. Outside of that, Europe is one area that we are seeing some very good progress with specific customers. I would say from a scale-up perspective of phase I, we are assuming that it will be largely between three to six months for customers to kind of validate the site in Dahej. We can assume six months, maybe a half year, of FY 2028 to have commercial supplies and generate revenue for that. Perfect. Just last one clarification on Q2 margins. We said that we had benefit from the low-cost RM, and at the same time, there was adverse impact from the higher freight cost. Given that we have reached about 37% margins, can we safely assume that for the next couple of quarters, barring any incremental disruptions, the margins would be able to stabilize at these levels? I would say PFN has benefited from a lot of operational leverage, that we will continue to see. PFN independently should be able to sustain. Specialty will also sustain. Just to keep in mind that the greenfield that we have just capitalized and commissioning or have received approvals, that will start to operate at a lower utilization, but will have certain operating costs. Those will come in. The goal will be to kind of sustain these margin levels. There would not be any significant change from these margin levels. But we would have certain battery costs as we continue to come close to commercialization and the operating costs from the greenfield, that will also kind of start getting accounted in our P&L. Perfect. Thanks a lot for answering all the questions, and all the best. Thank you, Rohit. Thank you. That was the last question for today. I now hand the conference over to the management for closing comments. I would like to once again thank Rohit and the 360 ONE team for hosting today's call, and all our participants and shareholders, I would like to wish them in advance a very happy Diwali and a very happy and prosperous New Year. Happy Diwali to you all, and Happy New Year. Thank you. On behalf of 360 ONE Capital Market Private Limited, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.