Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to Vedanta Limited second quarter and first half financial year 2025-26 earnings conference call. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during the conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star, then zero on your touch-tone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. Participants connected on Webcast link may change the quality settings to 1080p to watch the proceedings on best quality. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Charanjit Singh, Group Head, Investor Relations, Vedanta. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thank you, Yashasvi. Good evening, everyone, and welcome to Vedanta Limited H1 FY 26 earnings call. On behalf of Team Vedanta, I thank you all for joining us today. I hope you had the chance to look at the earnings presentation and the detailed financials that we have released. On this call, I have with me Mr. Deshnee Naidoo, our Group CEO, Mr. Arun Misra, our Executive Director, Mr. Ajay Goel, our Group CFO, Mr. Rajiv Kumar, CEO, Aluminum Business, Mr. Anup Agarwal, CFO, Aluminum Business, Mr. Jasmin Sahurity, COO, Oil and Gas Business, and Mr. Hitesh Vaid, CFO, Oil and Gas Business. We'll begin with an operational and strategic update by Ms. Naidoo, followed by financial highlights by Mr. Goel, and thereafter we'll open the lines for Q&A. Over to you, Deshnee. Thank you, Charanjit. Good evening, everybody. It is a pleasure to address you once again as we close the first half of FY 26, a period defined by volatility, resilience, and record performance. On the macroeconomic side, the first half of FY 26 unfolded against the backdrop of significant global uncertainty. The ongoing tariff disputes and conflicts in the Middle East and Europe created substantial turbulence in the commodity market. Aluminum prices on the LME ranged between $2,285 and $2,736 per ton, while zinc fluctuated between $2,521 and $3,019 per ton, a swing of nearly 20%. In addition, the early onset of monsoons across several operational regions and planned maintenance shutdowns added further complexity to our operating environment. Yet, despite these headwinds, we delivered our strongest first-half performance on record. Our quarter two EBITDA stood at INR 11,612 per ton, and our H1 EBITDA at INR 22,358 per ton, representing year-on-year growth of 12% and 8%, respectively. This outcome underscores the strength of our diversified portfolio, operational discipline, and focus on cost efficiency. Turning to the business performance, our aluminum business achieved its highest-ever quarterly and half-year production. Metal output reached 617,000 tons in quarter two and 1.22 million tons for H1. Alumina production also set new records at 643,000 tons for the quarter and 1,240,000 tons, 1.2 million tons for the half-year, growth of 31% and 19% year-on-year, respectively. While planned maintenance led to an uptick in power cost versus quarter one, we achieved a margin of $943 per ton, the highest in the last 14 quarters. On a half-year basis, power costs were reduced to $529 per ton, the lowest level post-COVID, demonstrating our continued progress towards cost optimization and full-year guidance on base metal cost. Hindustan Zinc delivered a record second-quarter mined metal production of 248,000 tons and a half-year total of 523,000 tons. Silver production was at 145 metric tons for quarter two and 293 metric tons for H1, in line with our lower lead volume. Yet silver contributed nearly 40% of total segment earnings. We achieved a five-year low cost of production at $994 per ton for quarter two and $1,002 per ton for H1, reflecting year-on-year reductions of 7% and 8%, respectively. Zinc International recorded a 38% year-on-year increase in metal and concentrate production in quarter two, supported by a 54% increase at Gamsberg. For H1, production rose 44% year-on-year, led by a 63% increase in Gamsberg. The cost of production at Gamsberg declined 8% year-on-year to $1,172 per ton, driven by higher volume, though partially offset by elevated treatment charges and currency fluctuations. At oil and gas, production stood at 89,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day in the quarter, impacted by natural declines in the Barmer field and delays in ASP pilot scale injection. T hese were partially offset by new wells at Aishwarya and ABH field. OpEx decreased 4% quarter on quarter due to the optimization of polymer injection and reduced planned maintenance activities. We expect ASP injection to stabilize production volumes from quarter three onwards. In power, the early monsoon moderated power demand in some regions, impacting operations at Meenakshi. Nevertheless, the business achieved record-high quarterly generation of 3.9 billion units. That's up 8% year-on-year and 4.4% quarter on quarter. Quarter two EBITDA stood at INR 228 per tonne, lower than quarter one, which had included a one-time gain of about 160 per tonne, awarded by the NCLT for electricity for the period prior charges. That's between 2016 and 2018. Saleable iron ore production rose 11% year-on-year in H1, despite monsoon-related disruptions. Our value-added business achieved a record pig iron production of 238,000 tons in quarter two and 451,000 tons in H1. We also received the letter of intent for the Janthakal mine in Karnataka, strengthening our resource base. At ESL and FACOR, planned maintenance temporarily impacted volumes. ESL's first-half output was at 623,000 tons, down 4% year-on-year, while FACOR's H1 production declined 12% year-on-year, following a one-month planned shutdown. With operations now fully resumed and the Kalarangiatta mine reactivated, both businesses are positioned for strong profitability in the coming quarters. On capital projects and capital expenditure, we invested approximately $0.9 billion in growth CapEx during the first half of FY 26, and are well on track to achieve our enhanced full-year capital guidance of between $1.7 billion and $1.9 billion. Key milestones include the commissioning of the 435,000 ton-per-annum smelter at BALCO, with the first metal production achieved earlier this month. At Lanjigarh, we began commissioning train two, which is an additional 1.5 million ton-per-annum capacity, and produced the first alumina from the new facility earlier this month. Hindustan Zinc commissioned the 160,000 ton-per-annum Debari roaster, completed debottlenecking at Dariba, and secured board approval for India's first zinc tailings processing/reprocessing plant at Ram pura Agucha. That's at a 10 million ton-per-annum capacity, reinforcing both our commitment to capital and our sustainability focus. Internationally, the Gamsberg Phase Two expansion, targeting 220,000 tons per annum incremental capacity, is now at 80% completion and is on track for commissioning by the end of FY 2026. In power, the Meenakshi and Athena plant added a combined 1.3 gigawatts in the first half of the year, bringing our total merchant power capacity to 4.2 gigawatts. These additions underscore our progress towards energy security and portfolio diversification. At Vedanta, responsible growth remains central to our purpose. The safety of our workforce remains our highest priority and a non-negotiable aspect of our business. We continue to strengthen the safety culture across our facilities through the implementation of critical risk management. Our safety performance metrics demonstrate continued improvements, with the total recordable incident frequency rate at 1.23 for the first half compared to 1.32 at the end of FY 25, and a loss-time injury frequency rate of 0.42, down from 0.52 in FY 25. Tragically, however, during the quarter, we lost a colleague in an incident at our Lanjigarh plant, and a detailed root cause analysis has been conducted, and the learnings are being implemented across all of our sites to prevent such incidents in the future. We are proud that Hindustan Zinc achieved the first Indian company to join the ICMM, the International Council on Mining and Metals, a global benchmark for responsible mining practices. Our environmental stewardship also advanced meaningfully. Across operations, we planted over 200,000 saplings and harvested almost 0.23 billion liters of rainwater in Barmer, reinforcing our focus on water sustainability. In line with our commitment to inclusive growth, our community development initiatives continued to make a meaningful impact. During the period, our programs reached over 930,000 women and children, while our skilling initiatives benefited about 500,000 families, enhancing livelihoods and promoting self-reliance. Further reinforcing our dedication to cultural preservation and community development, we signed an INR 85 crore MOU to restore heritage sites in Rajasthan, supporting the state's rich cultural legacy and fostering sustainable tourism. Our Vedanta 2.0 transformation continues to gain momentum, positioning us to lead India's growth in critical minerals, energy transition, and technology. During the first half of FY 2026, we secured three new strategic mineral blocks under India's critical minerals mission, expanding our portfolio across nickel, chromium, cobalt, vanadium, potash, and manganese. This brings the total number of secured blocks to 11. We have also made substantial progress on the proposed de-merger, which is a pivotal step towards unlocking further shareholder value. The final NCLT hearing is scheduled for November 12, and we expect approvals to follow. This will set the stage for the listing of all five de-merged entities by the end of FY 26, enabling greater strategic focus and enhanced value creation for all stakeholders. At the start of FY 26, global markets faced pronounced uncertainty, including a sharp decline in commodity prices. Yet our resilience has stood out. Even with lower average prices of most of our key commodities compared to FY 25, we achieved an 8% year-on-year EBITDA growth in the first half of the year. Looking ahead, I am confident that FY 26 will mark Vedanta's strongest year ever, surpassing our previous record EBITDA of $6 billion in FY 22. This performance will be powered by capacity expansion, production growth across aluminum, power, zinc international, iron and steel, and supported by recovering commodity prices. Thank you for your continued confidence and partnership as we advance towards another year of record for Vedanta. I will now pass over to Ajay to take us through our financial performance. Ajay. Thank you, Deshnee. Good evening, everyone. We continue the momentum and carry forward the progress in our operations, financial results, balance sheet, and strategic initiatives. The macro environment has improved, and still there is uncertainty. Vedanta's diversified business model and disciplined execution have enabled us to deliver our highest-ever second-quarter revenue of INR 39,218 crores, up 6% year-on-year, and a record second-quarter EBITDA of INR 11,612 crores, up 12% YOY. On a half-year basis, we delivered our highest-ever H1 revenue of INR 76,652 crores and a record H1 EBITDA of INR 22,358 crores, growing 6% and 8% YOY, respectively, reflecting resilience and consistency across portfolio. Our profitability remains robust. Second-quarter PAT before exceptional items stands at INR 5,027 crores, up 13% YOY, while reported PAT at INR 3,479 crores impacted by certain one-time exceptional items. This quarter, we have recorded two exceptional items of INR 1,547 crores net of taxes. The first matter is regarding TSPL, mega matter. Now, pursuant to Supreme Court's judgment, we have recognized the impact of INR 1,407 crores provision against accounts receivable in the matter of a dispute with TSPL's claim regarding benefit of custom duty received in TSPL. A review petition has been filed against this order, but on accounting basis, we have taken the provision. The second matter is regarding SEPCO settlement. As part of de-merger proceedings, a full and final settlement of INR 650 crores has been done with SEPCO, thereby resolving a longstanding dispute, paving the way for a proposed de-merger process. Similarly, in Q2 last year, we have recorded net exceptional income of INR 1,160 crores, mainly on account of oil and gas impairment reversal. Our EBITDA margin expanded to 34%, improving at about 70 basis points YOY, supported by favorable pricing, marketing premiums, exchange rate gains, and continued cost efficiencies. Our large businesses, which together contribute over 90% of Vedanta's EBITDA, continue to deliver strong earnings. Aluminum EBITDA at INR 5,532 crores, up 33% YOY, with a 35% margin driven by record production and cost optimization. Zinc India EBITDA of INR 4,434 crores, up 8% YOY, with a best-in-class 54% margin driven by record mine life and a five-year low cost of production. Similarly, in Cairn oil and gas, EBITDA of INR 1,029 crores, maintaining a healthy 44% margin, where operational improvements have offset the natural decline in terms of EBITDA. Other businesses, including power and iron steel, are progressing well to accelerate on a strong growth trajectory. Our ROC improved sharply by 347 basis points YOY, to at about 26%, reinforcing our disciplined allocation of capital and focus on value creation. We remain focused on disciplined growth. In H1, we invested $0.9 billion in growth capex. Multiple growth projects, such as new smelter commissioning at zinc and power expansions, are progressing collectively to drive future earnings across pricing cycles. On balance sheet side, we have further strengthened our leverage. Our net debt-to-EBITDA ratio stands at 1.37x, improving from 1.49x last year. Both CRISIL and ICRA have reaffirmed Vedanta's rating at AA. We are making solid progress towards attaining AA rating in the near future. We closed the quarter with INR 21,481 crores of liquidity, ensuring ample flexibility for growth and contingencies. Further, we paid an interim dividend of INR 16 per share this quarter, delivering a TSR of about 13% on a YTD basis. At Vedanta, we have reduced our interest cost to 9%, with average maturity tenure of about three years, a direct outcome of our proactive trade management. We are targeting to bring down our average cost of borrowings to below 8% in the near term. At our parent company, Vedanta Resources, we have refinanced $550 million of last high-cost debt, reducing the overall interest rate from 11.6% to about 10% and flattening the maturity curve to just $500 million per year in the near future. Over the last two years, our average maturity profile at VRL has improved significantly from 1.3 years to now at 4.5 years. With most high-cost debt now retired, VRL is positioned to operate on autopilot mode, supported by a dividend payout of 4%-5% in the future and routine refinancing. On the de-merger, we are at the final stage. We remain confident of completing our de-merger by the end of this fiscal unlocking focused value across our five verticals. In summary, we remain encouraged about macro fundamentals, operational momentum, and strengthened balance sheet. With several growth projects coming online and a stronger expected run rate in H2, we are confident in achieving an annual EBITDA of more than $6 billion in FY 26 at Vedanta India consolidated level, surpassing previous records and supporting Vedanta's transformation into a global leader in critical minerals, energy transition, and technology. Thank you, and over to the operator for Q&As. 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 the touch-tone 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. We'll take our first question from the line of Ashish Kejriwal from Nuvama Institutional Equities. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi. Good evening, everyone. Thanks for the opportunity. Quickly, three questions for me. One, if you can, help us understanding about the situation of Jaiprakash Associates deal which we have done. Is there a possibility of rebuilding over there, or is it just a COC giving the final verdict, and then one can go ahead with that? That's my first question. Second is on the demerger. We have seen multiple delays on account of it, especially in the second motion. So do you think that 12th November could be the final hearing, and after that, some things can be decided? Thank you, Ashish. Ashish, before I answer, you know, the question on Jaiprakash, I just want to remind everyone about our interest in this bit. You know, while Jaiprakash has five different segments, as you all know, the key chapter for us is actually always going to be the power business, to be Jaiprakash. JP Group has a power portfolio of 2,200 megawatts, which is expandable to 4,000 megawatts, given the availability of land that it has at these two power plants. This acquisition is an important milestone, as you all know, in our journey to increase our merchant power capacity by 20 gigawatts, as we have guided previously by 2030. The current portfolio of 2,200 megawatts includes the 1,800 megawatts of thermal capacity and 400 megawatts of hydro. That generates an EBITDA of INR 2,100-2,600 crores. The replacement cost of this 2,200 megawatts is around 24,000 crores, which translates into about, I think, 6,000 crores for the 24% stake in JAL, which JAL holds in these assets. I just wanted to make that point because, you know, considering the cost and time that we know it takes to actually build a greenfield power plant or to restore one, you know, that the cost and time savings from that 1,800-megawatt plant and expansion at the existing plant sites, the net replacement cost to JP's power portfolio, we work out to be maybe INR 8,000-INR 9,000 per crore at our estimate, which is about 70% of our book NPV. So I wanted to put that into context in terms of the rationale, or as I put it, a key catalyst for the acquisition from our side. And I also want to make the point that this deal doesn't impact our deleveraging plan or our de-merger plan. And as you rightly said, it's now left to process. Currently, the COC is evaluating this, and the resolution will be submitted, or the resolution plan will be submitted by the. But we will share our way forward post the COC decision. Ajay, would you like to supplement? Yes. Very specifically, Ashish, in terms of can this bid go for rebidding? Analytically, since IBC enactment in December 2016, it is less than a decade, and hence the entire legal landscape is still stabilizing in the country. There are multiple rulings by the court which speaks about eventually it is a wisdom of the committee of the creditors that selects the eventual outcome in terms of who is the final bidder, and hence it may or may not be the H1 bidder. Now, having said that, on this today's rebidding news, you may have seen earlier the bid by the same group was rejected by COC. Now, somebody may also look at how this INR 18,000 crores will be funded by the same group. So in summary, we think it is highly unlikely that Jaiprakash will go for rebidding, and we feel quite confident that Jaiprakash is committed. Sure. Maybe we can, Ajay, actually shall take the other question around de-merger timeline. Bombay Bench of the NCLT heard the petition on the 29th, and they posted the matter for final hearing on the 12th of November. We are confident that the matter will be brought to resolution on the 12th, which will be in time then for what we've already guided the market in terms of getting this done by the end of FY 26. Understood. Ma'am, actually why I'm asking is because I think we have already submitted the written application, and we have given the response to the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas also. So on that basis, do we think that we have given a reasonable satisfaction to those guys? Yes, we do. Yes, we do. And that is why we believe that that matter heard on the 12th with MoPNG should be sufficient. Thanks. That's great. And lastly, my question is on alumina price. You know, when can we see the effect of lower alumina price in our numbers, and have we done any commodity hedges? If yes, how much it could be? Thank you. Kishavi, I'm going to go straight to Anup. So thank you, Ashish. Now, coming to your question on alumina, so as you can see, you know, in quarter two, our cost in alumina has gone down by $50. And as we ramp up Lanjigarh, and we have the advantage of lower API, we expect in the next two quarters the prices to go down further by $50 each. So as we exit this year, you will see we will be closer to $700 to $710. So that benefit is going to come from three counts. One, the higher capacity coming from Lanjigarh, where we will ramp up our production, whatever run rate of, say, 4 million as we exit the year. The second, from a lower cost at Lanjigarh, and third, as you rightly said, from the lower price. Now, some difference is coming because last time also I had said that some of our third-party purchases are also linked to the LME, and because of the higher LME, it's taking this time to terminate. But as we increase our captive quota, you will see that benefit coming. Ashish, hopefully I have answered your question. Yeah. So just to make it clear, you said $50 per ton fall in price in each quarter for next two quarters for alumina products? Yes. From the quarter two levels, $50 per ton in quarter three and $50 per ton in quarter four. That's great, sir. That's very helpful. And lastly, on commodity hedges, have we done anything in aluminum? Ajay, maybe, Ashish, I'll give you overall for Vedanta as a group. Yes. I mean, hedging is one area in terms of the margin protection and the cash. We are actively hedging across the portfolio. If I speak of aluminum, for the current year, FY 2026, the quantity hedged is almost 300 KT, and that makes almost 12% of the volume on a full yearly basis, and pricing remains $1,625 per ton. We have also hedged almost 470 KT for next year, FY 2027. That's about 17% of annual volume, and here, the pricing is about a little over $2,600 per ton, so in summary, $300 for the current year, $470 for next year. That's about 12% and 17% current year and next year, and the pricing a little over $2,625. Our second equally important portfolio is zinc at Zinc India, and there, the quantity hedged is about 97 KT for the current fiscal. It's about 10% for the volume, and the pricing is almost $2,900 per ton. We also hedged silver. It's about 123 tons at about 17% volume for the full fiscal, and the pricing is about $37 per troy ounce. So across the portfolio, we have reasonable hedge, and this is one area we'll keep watching given the tumultuous pricing in the current system. That's very helpful, Ajay. Thank you, and all the best team. Thank you, Ashish. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Indrajit Agarwal from CLSA. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity. I have a couple of questions. First, on aluminum, can you help us understand the other costs, the power costs, conversion costs, et cetera, how those will trend in the next couple of quarters? So the point is, would the entire $50 reduction in alumina float to cash cost, or that could be offset by the other cost? Second is on the other assets of JPA. What kind of roadmap, what kind of plan do you have? Do you have a timeline in mind? Whether do you want to divest or do you actually want to operate those assets for some time? Third, a bookkeeping question. What is the current debt at VRL level? So let's start first, Indrajit, with the aluminum cost. I'm going to hand over to Anup, but maybe before I do, so we delivered a COP, hot metal COP of $1,826 per ton in the quarter. That was versus the $1,765 that we did in quarter one. And just to reconcile the numbers quickly, the power cost increased of $75 per ton, as I mentioned as well in my opening remarks. We offered that with carbon increases as well. And other costs have increased around $40 per ton. And then our alumina cost, as Anup just mentioned, was reduced. So offset some of that by $53 per ton quarter on quarter. So I think, Anup, when you speak, let's go in terms of quarter three, just high level, what the production numbers will look like, and where do we see the cost improvements coming in. And then the one area I do want us to focus on is on power cost. So let's start there, and we'll come back to you on the JP question. Anup? Well, thank you, Indrajit. Thank you, Deepi. So Indrajit, okay, before I come to your question, so let me reiterate that we are on the track for full year guidance with H2 hot metal cost being sub-1,650. Now, I covered your power cost. See, we guided last time also in quarter one, if you recall, that we had taken some major power shutdown. Now, the timely power plant shutdown will enable us to achieve sub-$500 per ton power cost in H2 FY 26. We expect average alumina cost, as I said, to be lower $50 each in quarter three and quarter two. Okay. Carbon has been slightly rising, around $15 increase from quarter one to quarter two. But on the other operating efficiency, we believe that we should have an advantage of, say, $20-$25. Out and out from quarter two, as Deshnee said, from a COP of $1,826 per ton, H2 we expect it to be sub-$1,650. Indrajit? This is very helpful. Thank you so much. I think, Indrajit, just on the JAL acquisition, we know the process is still, you know, there's still a process underway, and only once the COC process has been finally resolved will we come back to the market with a detailed plan. There's a lot of options within the five different business segments, but I tried to upfront explain what the primary catalyst was. On the rest of it, following COC, we will definitely come back to the market. I don't want to be preemptive at this point. Ajay, you take the next one. Yes. The third part you asked, Indrajit, debt at Vedanta Resources. So as of September end, it's the external debt at about $4.4 billion. And plus, as you know from Vedanta, there's an ICL, which is again $400 million. So overall debt, internal and external, is $4.9 billion. Maybe I also take this opportunity of covering the how do we want to look at financing in second half at VRL next couple of years. For the current year, between Q3 and Q4, we have no impending maturities. What remains to be cashed out at VRL in second half, the interest cost at about $270-$280 million. One of the options remains to fund that using dividend. Over the next couple of years, for example, the next year, the external maturity is about $300, plus $200 is ICL, the last range. Total need for maturity at VRL next year is about $500 million. This number in FY 28, second year, is about $450 million. Over the next three years, the maturity at VRL will be about $500 million. That can be easily managed by paying 4%-5% dividend yield. Secondly, the interest cost at VRL, given both deleveraging and lower cost of funding, will be almost 400 or thereabouts. And that will be equal to the routine brand fee, even at the current levels. So in summary, over the next three years, both the maturities and the interest cost at VRL, as I earlier mentioned, will be practically on autopilot mode. Thank you for your detailed answers. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Sumangal Nevatia from Kotak Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah, good evening. Thank you for the chance. I just wanted the update on the various approvals for the various mines which we are awaiting. So first is Kurloi, Ghogharpalli, and Radhikapur. If you can share in the last one or two quarters, has there been any progress on the pending EC and FC? Also on Sijimali, I read that FY 26 is when we are expecting to start, end of FY 26. So if you could just share what is the status of the EC, FC there. Thank you. Thank you, Sumangal. Rajiv, I'll go straight to you. We start with Kurloi, FC stage one, approval on 12th of May, 2025. We are in the last stage of compliance of FC stage one and complying to FC stage two. Then we get the CTE and then the commissioning of the mine. That's Kurloi. Radhikapur, mine plan is approved. Forest clearance stage one is granted, and the submission of stage one compliance is in progress. EC is granted. Ghogharpalli, for EC, we collected and issued a letter to SPCB, the State Pollution Control Board, for confirming the time, date, and venue for public hearing. Anything else I have answered? For Sijimali, Sijimali, to get the EC, we have handed over 1,760 acres of compensatory forestation land to the state. Going by the process, the State Forest Department has taken up the matter with the MOEFCC for the grant of FC1. MOEFCC has sought some clarification from the state, which has been processed. We are hopeful for the mine to become operational in the current financial year. Thank you so much, Rajiv. Maybe just to add, Sumangal, on Sijimali, we have previously communicated quarter four, FY 2026. So we are keeping the commercial Rajiv guidance. On Kurloi, previously we had communicated quarter three this year. I think given the timeline there, we might push it out by a couple of months to quarter four this year. And in Ghogharpalli, we had originally communicated the second quarter of FY 2027. That might move out by a quarter, but still positive that that would be quarter two, quarter three, FY 2027. So just to reiterate the timeline. Thank you. Understood. Understood. That's very useful. My second question is on the ICL of around $400 million. If you can share, what is the plan to close that? In the past, we've kind of rolled it forward. So what is the latest timeline for closing it? Okay. So the remainder part of the ICL is about $417 million, $417 million, out of which $200 million is due in January. And the balance, $217 million, sometime in May next year. We intend to repay it as scheduled. We are not looking at any further rollover. Okay. Okay. Got it. And just one last question on the power division. Now, next year, FY 2027, Athena Meenakshi both would be fully commissioned. So on a steady-state basis, what is our expectation for the PLF? And in terms of EBITDA per ton, if you can guide what is the ballpark range that we should bake in? Sorry, EBITDA per unit. Thank you. Thank you, Sumangal. Maybe I'll break it down a little, make it a little easier. So maybe by the end of quarter four for both Meenakshi and Athena, we'll just talk about capacity PLF, maybe cost and realization. And that will give you a better sense. So by quarter four, Meenakshi capacity will be at one gigawatt. PLF will be around 65%. Cost of generation in Rupees per unit, 4.7. And the realization will be around 5.7. And Athena, we'd have hopefully both units commissioned then. PLF about 87%. Cost of generation, 2.8 Rupees per unit. And realization at 5.7. That should give you a sense of what the profitability would look like by the time both units are ramped up. Got it. This is exit of fourth quarter or average fourth quarter expectation? Average fourth quarter. Understood. That's very useful. Thank you and all the best. Thank you, Sumangal. Thank you. Before we take the next question, we'd like to remind participants to ask a question. Please press star and one on your phone. Next question is from the line of Ritesh Shah from Investec. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Thanks for the opportunity. First question is for Rajiv. Sir, if you could just repeat for FY 27 and 28, what was the maturity and the interest amount that you indicated? I think you did include 200 million of the 417 for FY 27, and you indicated 217 in May. If you could just refresh for FY 27 and 28, what you indicated? Yes, sir. No problem. Yes, sir, Ritesh. So for FY 27 next year, the total debt, which is external, is about $300 million, plus ICL $217 million, so about $500 million. FY 28, there is no ICL. So $450 million external debt. So $500 million next year. $450 million the year next. Interest will be almost $450 million next year, FY 27. And $400 million in FY 28. So $500 million next year maturities. $450 million is interest. So give and take $950 million to $1 billion total requirement. FY 28, $450 million are the maturities. And $400 million interest. So about $850 million. Sure. That's useful. And congratulations for the recent bond issuance at 500, 550. I just wanted to understand the breakup of $4.9 billion, what you indicated, because we would have taken out certain high-cost debt at 16%-18%. So how should one look at the breakup of bonds and loans for the outstanding debts at 4.5%? And the balance, I presume, is ICL. Ritesh Shah here. You need to look at the slide number 25. That has all the details with respect to the breakup and also the cost. Sure. Good. I'll just move to the second question. This question was for Deshnee. Ma'am, thanks for explaining the underlying rationale for the JP Group. But just wanted to clarify that the numbers that you have indicated, is it adjusted for economic interest, basically when we say INR 2,100 crores of EBITDA? Ritesh, these are the reported performance of the company in the past two, three years. This is JP's reported number. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. I appreciate that. But what I'm asking is, if you adjust for economic interest, the actual numbers will be significantly lower. So just trying to understand the rationale behind it. And specifically, you did indicate the amount that we have put on the bid. Just wanted to understand, however, we're looking at there are multiple contingent liabilities on the asset. So how do we plan to take care of it? Repeating what Deshnee mentioned earlier, that we will come up with a very detailed, comprehensive explanation, business by business segment, once the COC decision is made. Charanjit, what I'm trying to understand is the rationale for bidding the asset, which has several subsets, and there is several contingent liabilities on each of the assets. Vedanta is going full throttle on the right direction right now. Then why are we going for JAL only for power assets, wherein the other assets there are significant issues which are there? So I'm just trying to gauge the risk. And obviously, there would be some quantification of the risk. I'm trying to understand that. See, I think that's what we have been trying to explain, even in the one-to-one meetings and also on this call, that we are in position to provide a detailed explanation and our reason once the COC decision is made. Until then, I think you need to understand that we have our hands tied up with respect to explaining the details. Fair. I'll just take one last question. Hello? Can I take one last question? Yes, we can hear you. Yeah. Hi. So, ma'am, we understand that we had settlements on SEPCO. Just wanted to understand that we have this thing with the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and something with Directorate General of Hydrocarbons. Are we ready to furnish certain bank guarantees? If yes, what is the quantum over there? What we pick up from the last reported numbers in the press was almost $520 million. So I'm just trying to understand, given there's a lot of confidence on the demerger timelines, are we ready to furnish a bank guarantee over here to the extent what I indicated so that the timelines what we have indicated, probably we have a far more confidence on that particular variable? Yes, Ritesh. So you remember, even at the last call, we had taken this question because the objection was raised then. I just want to confirm to everyone, MOPNG's concern is actually, as you rightly mentioned, the financial risk faced in recovering some of these alleged at this point alleged claims from the business and basically questioning whether the P&L of the demerger oil and gas business would actually be able to sustain these should they realize. Their concern has been taken care of by us providing a corporate guarantee from Vedanta. So that's already in place. Ma'am, would it be possible to quantify the amount over here? Say it's a guarantee that does cover us for the full extent of the alleged claims at this point, Ritesh. Of course, all of these numbers will be finalized once the demerger is actually finalized. Sure. Thank you for the answers. Sure. I'll join back with you. All the very best. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Vikas Singh from ICICI Securities. Please go ahead. Good evening, and thank you for the opportunity. Just my first question pertains to currently assuming JAL is not clear right now, and your VAL requirement is very low. In case of these two, should we assume that our net debt would see a declining trend from here onwards? Yes, Vikas. Of course. I mean, I'll start with a look at maybe the past couple of years. At the parent company, Vedanta Resources, over the last three odd years, our debt from $9.1 billion now down to almost $4.4 billion September end. It is a decade-low debt at Vedanta Resources. We also have publicly committed that from current $4.4 billion, we'll go down to $3 billion over the next two years. Coming to Vedanta India, the operating company, the way to look at more so when we are in the high growth path, it is debt-to-EBITDA ratio, which has improved from almost 1.88 leverage to 1.37 as we closed the previous quarter. From here, we have committed that at Vedanta India Consolidated, our debt-to-EBITDA will further improve to 1x. So $3 billion Vedanta Resources, 1x leverage Vedanta India. That goal remains unchanged. Any other priority will remain subservient to that goal. Noted. So absolute debt probably might not go down. My second question pertains to this 1 lakh crore investment news in Odisha, which keeps on floating. Could you give us some color on the segments and the timelines for that? Okay. So the 1 lakh crore investment that Vedanta has committed, it of course remains Vedanta's long-term vision for the state where we operate. And you may have seen even earlier in a couple of large geographies where we operate in terms of zinc, oil and gas, and aluminum specifically, the commitment is made. Now, you would appreciate, Vikas, these commitments also need lots of partnership and support from the state government to enable in terms of land allotment and multiple approvals. So at this point in time, it will be very difficult to give a committed timeline than at what timeframe we do spend 1 lakh crore. In the interim, as we have been previously guiding in terms of CapEx for the current fiscal, our range remains $1.7-$1.9 billion. And over the next three years, cumulatively, collectively, it will be about $4.5-$5 billion. Noted. I mean, the undertaken commitment last week, there was a reiteration of previous commitments that we had made. And really, the collaboration to development, as Rajiv is also guiding in the market, the 3 million tonnes per annum additional aluminum plants and the aluminum hub that we will be looking to put up. And this will be part of a major hub for downstream producers on aluminum products within the state as well. So it's part of a larger, a much larger plan that the chairman has already spoken in public last year and has reiterated to the chief minister in last week's discussion. Noted. And lastly, any progress has been made on the Northeast or Eastern India side of oil and gas fields which we have acquired? Thank you, Vikas. I'd like for Yasmin or Ritesh to take this and also introduce yourself, Yasmin, since it's the first time you're speaking to some of the investors in our list. Hello, sir. Everybody, I'm Jasmin Sahurity, COO of Cairn Oil & Gas. I've been in this position for the last six months. In terms of the Northeast, we had a very fruitful discussion over the last week with the chief minister, and we confirmed our commitment of investment, especially in the our Oil and Gas business. So far, plans are to have two discoveries besides the one already confirmed. Develop and confirm the hydrocarbon to the potential of 200 million barrels reserves. And after that, alongside investment into the society, into the future development of the Northeast region will be confirmed. This is so far what I can say. But in a nutshell, first, well, which will be confirming the new reserves in the Rudra region, will be end of November spudded. Second, well in Nagaland region will be spudded in February. And we can expect till end of this financial year, confirmation of the reserves in between 100 and 130 million barrels usable. And Vikas, ma'am? No worries. Thank you. Vikas, does that answer your question? Yeah, thanks. Thank you. We'll take a next question from the line of Abhishek Roy from JM Financial. Please go ahead. Hello. Thank you. What further recent contact has there been from the Enforcement Directorate? And is the ED aware that Vedanta Resources has no corporate office or staff in London to justify the brand deal? More importantly, the strategic services agreement. Sorry, can you repeat the question? What recent contact has there been from the Enforcement Directorate in relation to the recent reports in your accounts? And is the Enforcement Directorate aware that Vedanta Resources has no corporate office in London or any staff in London, but they are being paid strategic services agreement fees? Yes, maybe just to ask. So there's no specific engagement. But maybe just to answer the question more broadly first. In the normal course of business, statutory agencies just seek information for us. And as always, we have been very compliant in terms of responding. We've had nothing specific from ED. That's the first. And the second, in terms of the Vedanta offices, I think everyone understands our very lean corporate center model. And in London specifically, the corporate offices do run out of Hill Street, which again is very well known, and there is a small center there. But that office is also supported by resources dedicated through service agreements from Vedanta Limited as well out of both Mumbai and Delhi. And that's the operating model fairly well understood in the market. Okay. So does that not cause an issue with transfer pricing? It's the services that are actually being performed in India, but there's $400 million-$450 million a year going to London for strategic services. If those services are being delivered in India, then presumably that's a transfer pricing issue that the ED is concerned about, and we know that they were concerned about back in 2023. Maybe I'll take it slowly. See, the rationale for overall brand fee and strategic services has been also addressed in the past in detail. Overall, the entire contract is monolithic. It is not separable between the usage for the Vedanta brand and the Vedanta name as such, and also services we get from the VRL team across many areas. They can be in terms of strategic acquisitions, mergers, capital markets, and much more. What I can say is that none of that teams in London. Which is where the money's going. It don't have to be domiciled at a geography. When we use a logo or a name as Vedanta and get services, it is a service that is being rendered and a service that is being received by Vedanta India entities. That is most important. I may like to also point out that the entire brand fee agreement has been internationally benchmarked. There are multiple studies done by one of the best Big Four firms. The brand fee rate which has been charged over the last few years, in fact, is lower than the median rate recommended by the Big Four firms. So in summary, I would like to say the entire brand fee has been legally vetted. It has stood the test of scrutiny by multiple regulators, and we don't see a challenge from the legal viewpoint. Thank you for that. Just one last point on that. It's a related party transfer. Abhishek, I request you to join back the queue, please, as we have other participants waiting for their turn. Abhishek, I request you to join back the queue, please. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we request you to restrict to one question at a time, please. Next question is from the line of Imtiaz Shefuddin from Barclays. Please go ahead. Great. Thank you very much. Am I audible? Yes, please go ahead. Hello. Yes, we can hear you. Please go ahead. Yes. Yes. I just have one question, and this relates to KCM. Has there been any progress on the initial funding of the $1 billion over five years that you are trying to raise for KCM? Yes, thank you for that, Imtiaz. So in the normal course of business and per the shareholder agreement, we remain compliant with what we have agreed with the shareholder agreement yet today. That's about $130-odd million in the first half of the year. In terms of the rest of the KCM funding, I think everyone would be very happy to know that KCM is now operating on an integrated network basis around 8,500-9,000 tons per month, which is actually close to numbers that this business last achieved in 2017, and at these corporate prices, they've been able to sustain both the operational cash requirements as well as the sustaining capital cash requirements. In terms of the larger investment, KCM is in the process of finalizing the KDMP feasibility study. Once that feasibility study is complete and approved, we will make a funding decision for KCM. In terms of the fundraising for that, I think we find ourselves in a very fortunate position given the current integrated production and hence the cash flows the asset is generating. Given the current price environment and an appetite for anything associated with copper right now, we are very confident that we would have several avenues available once the project is investment-ready. So KCM is progressing well. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, just to follow up, any funding that's going to be done at KCM, I think you mentioned the last time that it would be ring-fenced within KCM, yeah? Is that still the case? That is absolutely. That is still the case. In fact, I think I am more positive today than I was a quarter ago given what's happening on the production ramp-up as well as the copper prices. Great. Thank you very much. And just congrats on your first-half performance. Thank you, Imtiaz. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll take that as the last question for today. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Charanjit Singh for closing comments. Over to you, sir. Thanks, everyone, for taking out the time to join us. Look forward to our Q3 in January when we report our numbers. So thanks and have a nice weekend, everyone. Thank you. On behalf of Vedanta Limited, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.