Cosmic Pv Power Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does — assembles solar PV modules at two plants in Tadkeshwar, Surat, on leased or licensed premises, with smaller businesses in solar EPC work and aluminium frames; module installed capacity was 1.40 GW a year at September 2025 and 3.00 GW at the date of the DRHP (AP p.3, DRHP p.21, DRHP p.47).

Who pays it — other solar manufacturers and brands (OEMs), EPC contractors and distributors; OEMs were 60.49% of revenue in the six months to September 2025 (AP p.3). The largest customer was 30.37% of revenue and the top ten 80.10% (AP p.4).

Why it is raising money — ₹4,971.43 million towards a 1.10 GW TOPCon solar-cell plant in Narmadapuram, Madhya Pradesh, and the rest for general purposes (DRHP p.140).

How fast it has grown — revenue from ₹480.97 million in FY23 to ₹2,451.61 million in FY25, and ₹1,816.93 million in the six months to September 2025 (AP p.7).

The one thing to understand — a fast-expanding assembler moving upstream into cells, funded so far by debt. Borrowings rose from ₹559.28 million to ₹1,353.42 million in the six months to September 2025, while operating cash flow was negative ₹183.63 million and investment spending ₹787.57 million (AP p.7).

02The business, in plain words

A module maker buys solar cells, glass, encapsulant sheets, backsheets and frames, laminates them into panels, and supplies developers, contractors and other module brands.

A solar brand needs panels for its customers → it orders modules from Cosmic PV, sometimes under its own brand → Cosmic PV assembles them in Surat from bought cells and glass → it delivers and invoices per watt.

The company is on the government's approved list of module manufacturers (ALMM List-I) for 1.30 GW, which lets it supply government and government-assisted projects that must use listed modules (AP p.3). It has sold to more than 661 customers since starting in 2021 (AP p.3).

Earnings equation: Profit ≈ megawatts shipped × (module price − cell, glass and other material cost − conversion cost) − interest. Operating EBITDA margin was 15.25% in the six months to September 2025 (AP p.8).

03Where the money comes from

Source: AP p.3, AP p.4. H1 FY26 is six months.

Source: AP p.4.

Named top-ten customers in the six months include Insolation Green Energy, Polite Powertech, Goldi Solar, Navitas Solar, Navitas Green Solutions, ECE (India) Energies, Infisol Energy and Sahaj Solar (DRHP p.32).

04The growth record

Source: AP p.7, AP p.8. H1 FY26 is six months. The KPI table gives six-month revenue as ₹1,817.93 million (AP p.8).

05What the growth is made of

Capacity and orders. Nameplate capacity rose from 100 MW in FY23 to 1,400 MW at September 2025, and production from 31.78 MW to 241.46 MW in the six months (AP p.8). The order book went from ₹46.87 million at March 2023 to ₹3,878.65 million at March 2025 and ₹12,515.10 million, or 1,577.47 MW, at September 2025 (AP p.8). The order book at September 2025 was 5.1 times FY25 revenue (our arithmetic, AP p.8).

06Earnings quality

Profit has not turned into cash: over FY23 to September 2025 the company booked ₹456.65 million of profit and generated negative ₹115.94 million from operations (our arithmetic, AP p.7). Inventory days rose from 44 in FY23 to 102 in the six months (AP p.8). Related-party transactions were ₹384.90 million, or 21.18% of revenue, in the six months to September 2025, up from 3.08% in FY25 (DRHP p.42). The statutory auditors made no reservations, qualifications, adverse remarks or emphasis of matter (AP p.10).

07The balance sheet

Source: AP p.7, AP p.8.

Net worth rose ₹579.84 million in FY25 while profit was ₹244.39 million, so shares were issued that year (our arithmetic, AP p.7). Share capital then rose from ₹17.31 million to ₹667.39 million by September 2025 (AP p.7), and acquisition prices are stated after a bonus issue (AP p.9).

08What the money is for

Source: DRHP p.140.

The plant is estimated to cost ₹5,012.80 million, of which ₹41.37 million had been spent at filing (DRHP p.140). The land, 24.66 hectares, was allotted by Madhya Pradesh Development Corporation on 15 January 2026 (AP p.6). The abridged prospectus gives the amount from the proceeds as ₹4,971.64 million (AP p.6).

09Who is selling

Source: AP p.1, AP p.10. The last row's amount is our arithmetic from the ₹1,000 million total.

10Promoters

The promoters are Jenishkumar Deepakkumar Ghael, Shravan Kumar Gupta, Surabhi Sureshchandra Sahu and Maitry Jenishkumar Ghael (AP p.5). Jenishkumar Ghael, chairman and whole-time director from 1 October 2025, holds a commerce degree, has passed the ICAI professional competence examination, has over 9 years of experience, and is the sole proprietor of Green Energy and karta of Jenishkumar Deepakkumar Ghael HUF (Cosmic Energy and Engineering) (AP p.5). Shravan Kumar Gupta, managing director from 1 October 2025, has over 13 years of experience, including at Citizen Solar and Mainframe Energy Solutions (AP p.5). Surabhi Sahu, formerly an executive director heading HR, became a non-executive director on 1 October 2025 (AP p.5).

11Who already owns it

Source: AP p.6.

The four promoters hold 82.98% (our arithmetic, AP p.6). Vinay Rajendrakumar Nagda holds 2.49% and Chanakya Opportunities Fund I 0.98% (AP p.6).

12What changed just before the IPO

• Capacity — from 1.40 GW at September 2025 to 3.00 GW by the DRHP date (AP p.3).
• Order book — tripled in six months to ₹12,515 million (AP p.8).
• Borrowings — up ₹794 million in six months (AP p.7).
• Board — new chairman, managing director and non-executive roles from 1 October 2025 (AP p.5).
• Related-party transactions — 21% of revenue in the six months (DRHP p.42).

13Capacity and expansion

Source: AP p.8.

The proceeds fund a move into solar cells, a new product for the company, at a greenfield site (AP p.6). The document lists delay and cost overrun at the new plant among its top risks (AP p.9).

14Market size and industry structure

The industry section is headed as sourced from a CRISIL report but quotes the Care report, which says India's renewable capacity reached 263.2 GW, or 50.6% of installed capacity, by January 2026, and that solar capacity grew from 35.6 GW in FY20 to 140.6 GW (AP p.5). newboard has not tested the report's statements.

15Competitive position

What the document claims, and what it rests on:

• Growth — among the fastest-growing module makers by FY23–FY25 revenue CAGR of 125.8%, citing the Care report (AP p.3).
• ALMM listing for 1.30 GW (AP p.3).
• Integration across modules, EPC and frames (AP p.3).

Against that: much larger listed module makers, dependence on bought-in cells, and ten customers providing four-fifths of revenue (AP p.4, AP p.9, DRHP p.160).

16Peers the company named

Source: DRHP p.160. Peer figures are total revenue; P/E uses prices on 27 February 2026.

No P/E is possible for the company until a price band is set.

17Risks, in plain words

• Customers. Ten customers were 80% of revenue (AP p.9).
• Suppliers and prices. Ten suppliers were 63.79% of raw-material purchases; cell, glass and frame prices move (AP p.9).
• Region. Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra are the main markets (AP p.9).
• Project. A new cell plant can run late or over budget (AP p.9).
• Debt and cash. Borrowings more than doubled in six months while operations used cash (AP p.7).
• Related parties. 21% of recent revenue involved related-party transactions (DRHP p.42).

18Litigation and regulatory matters

Source: AP p.11.

19Related-party transactions

Related-party transactions were ₹93.04 million in FY23, ₹122.67 million in FY24, ₹75.45 million in FY25 and ₹384.90 million in the six months to September 2025 (DRHP p.42). The counterparties and nature of the transactions were not read in detail for this study.

20What the offer document does not say

In the sections read for this study, the document does not give:

• Who the largest customer is, at 30% of recent revenue.
• Which related parties accounted for ₹385 million in the six months, in the pages read.
• How the plant's remaining cost beyond the proceeds, if any, will be met, in the pages read.
• What the criminal proceeding against a promoter concerns.
• The price band, lot size or issue dates, which is normal at DRHP stage.

21Five questions for management

1. Who are the related parties behind ₹385 million of transactions in six months, and what did they involve?
2. Who is the customer that provided 30% of recent revenue?
3. Why was operating cash flow negative while the order book tripled?
4. What cell-making experience does the team bring to the new plant?
5. Why did two promoters acquire their shares at ₹0.29 and two at about ₹25?

2Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 2 documents the company filed. The 42 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.