Oremet Alloys And Castings Limited IPO

01At a glance

What the company does: buys high-carbon silico manganese, high-carbon ferro manganese and, in some years, manganese ore from suppliers in West Bengal and resells them, mostly to steel makers abroad, without making anything itself (DRHP p.128, DRHP p.140).

Who pays it: 29 customers in FY26 in 18 countries, against 44 customers in 23 countries in FY24 (DRHP p.133). Exports were 89.79% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.29). Egypt alone was 28.31% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.134). Customers are not named; the document says it has no consent letters from them (DRHP p.135).

Why it is raising money: ₹25.0 crore of the fresh issue is for working capital, ₹10.0 crore in FY27 and ₹15.0 crore in FY28; the general corporate purposes amount is left blank (DRHP p.88). The two promoters, Yash Vardhan Birla and Abhishek Birla, are each selling up to 2,57,400 shares (DRHP p.1).

How fast it has grown: it has not grown over the three years. Revenue went from ₹248.2 crore in FY24 to ₹194.4 crore in FY25 and ₹230.6 crore in FY26, about −3.6% a year, while profit after tax went from ₹9.3 crore to ₹14.1 crore and back to ₹10.0 crore, about 3.5% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57).

The one thing to understand: this is a thin-margin trading business whose profit swings with metal prices and the rupee. Gross margin moved from 16.79% in FY24 to 18.36% in FY25 and 15.80% in FY26 (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.230), and FY26 carried a net foreign exchange loss of ₹6.5 crore against EBITDA of ₹10.9 crore (DRHP p.203, DRHP p.98). Other income was 25.4% of FY26 profit before tax (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57).

02The business, in plain words

What Oremet Alloys And Castings does

Oremet Alloys And Castings sits between Indian makers of ferro alloys and steel mills overseas. Ferro alloys are lumps of manganese, silicon and iron that steel makers add to molten steel to remove oxygen and sulphur and to make the steel harder. The company buys finished alloy from smelters in West Bengal, has it checked by inspection agencies, stores it near Kolkata and Haldia ports and ships it out (DRHP p.128, DRHP p.129, DRHP p.140). It owns no plant and no warehouse (DRHP p.137, DRHP p.140).

A steel maker abroad, or one in West Bengal, wants a set grade of silico manganese at a set date → the company quotes, issues a proforma invoice and either ships from stock held near the port or places a matching order with a West Bengal smelter → inspection agencies check the cargo at purchase, storage and loading, and it is shipped from Haldia or Kolkata port → the company is paid in US dollars, euros or dirhams against shipping documents, and claims a duty drawback of about 1% of the export value (DRHP p.129, DRHP p.130, DRHP p.29, DRHP p.234, DRHP p.140).

It runs two models. Under Just-in-Time, it holds stock near the port and delivers in about 10 to 15 days instead of the 30 to 45 days the document gives as normal for the trade, and it says it charges more for that speed (DRHP p.128, DRHP p.136). This brought 58.78% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.131). Under Buying Finished Goods, it buys only after a confirmed order and charges a market price; this was 41.22% (DRHP p.131). Every order, it says, is backed by a purchase order, and there are no long-term contracts with customers or suppliers (DRHP p.131, DRHP p.28).

Silico manganese was 93.92% of FY26 revenue and ferro manganese 6.08%; manganese ore sales stopped after FY25 (DRHP p.35). The company had 8 employees on its payroll at June 30, 2026, two of them top management (DRHP p.139). It was incorporated in Rajasthan in September 2020, converted to a public company in November 2024, and is moving its registered office from Ajmer to Kolkata, where it already operates, subject to an approval not yet received (DRHP p.64, DRHP p.152). The two present promoters took control in March 2022 through a rights issue (DRHP p.178).

Earnings equation: Revenue = tonnes of alloy shipped × price per tonne. The document gives neither tonnes nor price per tonne for any year, so the equation cannot be filled in. It gives revenue per customer instead: ₹7.95 crore in FY26 against ₹4.23 crore in FY25 (DRHP p.133). The other half of the equation is the margin between purchase and sale price, which the document reports as gross margin of 15.80% in FY26 (DRHP p.230).

03Where the money comes from

The company reports one segment, trading in minerals (DRHP p.206). By product, model and market it discloses:

Source: DRHP p.35, DRHP p.29, DRHP p.131, DRHP p.134. The country mix moves a great deal from year to year. In FY24 the largest markets were the UK at 17.95%, the UAE at 15.01% and Israel at 14.25%; by FY26 the UK was 4.92%, the UAE 2.15% and Israel 4.65%, while Egypt, Singapore at 12.68% and Malaysia at 8.23% grew (DRHP p.134). The company sold to 23 countries in FY24, 22 in FY25 and 18 in FY26 (DRHP p.133). It explains the FY25 fall in revenue by lower sales to European and Middle Eastern buyers (DRHP p.230).

Oremet Alloys And Castings customers: how concentrated the revenue is

Source: DRHP p.135; top three and top five are our arithmetic from the customer rows on the same page. Revenue does depend on a few buyers: in FY26 the top three were about a third of revenue and the top ten about three quarters (DRHP p.135). The customer count is small and falling, 44 in FY24, 46 in FY25 and 29 in FY26, and 17 of the 29 FY26 customers had bought in an earlier year (DRHP p.133). The abridged prospectus prints the top ten as 75.74% and 60.87% for FY26 and FY25, against 75.47% and 60.37% in the DRHP (AP p.7, DRHP p.28).

Read from the filing: several customer rows equal country rows exactly. The FY26 largest customer, ₹29.2 crore, equals FY26 sales to Singapore; the third largest, ₹23.6 crore, equals all FY26 sales in West Bengal; and the FY24 largest, ₹44.5 crore, equals FY24 sales to the UK (DRHP p.135, DRHP p.134). Each of those markets therefore appears to be one buyer. The document does not say so.

On the buying side the dependence is higher still. The top ten suppliers were 91.28% of FY26 purchases, 92.68% of FY25 and 96.27% of FY24, and the largest supplier alone 23.41% in FY26 and 31.10% in FY25 (DRHP p.28). All suppliers are in West Bengal and none is named (DRHP p.140, DRHP p.28).

04The growth record

Oremet Alloys And Castings financials: revenue, profit and margins

Source: DRHP p.57, DRHP p.58, DRHP p.56, DRHP p.98, DRHP p.215, converted from ₹ lakh. EBITDA here is the company's own definition, profit before tax plus depreciation and interest less other income (DRHP p.98). Profit after tax is above EBITDA in FY24 because other income of ₹6.2 crore is excluded from EBITDA and added back below it (DRHP p.57).

Our arithmetic over FY24 to FY26: revenue changed by about −3.6% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57), EBITDA rose about 23.7% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.98) and profit after tax rose about 3.5% a year (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57). EBITDA margin moved from 2.86% to 4.71%, up 185 basis points, so 2.9% to 4.7% rounded (DRHP p.98). Revenue fell 21.67% in FY25 and rose 18.63% in FY26 (DRHP p.230, DRHP p.228). Profit after tax rose 51.51% in FY25 and fell 29.28% in FY26 (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.230).

The year ends on March 31 throughout. The restatement changed FY25 materially: audited profit after tax of ₹16.3 crore became ₹14.1 crore restated, mainly through a ₹2.8 crore adjustment for exceptional items, and FY24 opening reserves carry a ₹2.1 crore prior period adjustment (DRHP p.210, DRHP p.198). The FY24 accounts were audited by the previous auditor, Vijay Bhushan Agarwal & Associates, and FY25 and FY26 by Jay Gupta & Associates (DRHP p.188).

What sits around the record:

• Cash: operating cash flow was ₹1.6 crore in FY26, −₹2.8 crore in FY25 and ₹1.7 crore in FY24 (DRHP p.58). Over the three years profit after tax added up to ₹33.4 crore and operating cash flow to ₹0.56 crore (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57, DRHP p.58).
• Other income was ₹3.4 crore in FY26, 25.4% of profit before tax of ₹13.4 crore (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57). It was mostly duty drawback of ₹2.0 crore, liabilities written back of ₹0.84 crore and profit on selling mutual fund units of ₹0.39 crore (DRHP p.202). In FY24 other income was 49.5% of profit before tax (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57).
• Currency: a net foreign exchange loss of ₹6.5 crore in FY26 sits in other expenses, against net gains of ₹1.4 crore in FY25 and ₹2.5 crore in FY24 (DRHP p.203, DRHP p.202). The loss on forward contracts alone was ₹6.8 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.31).
• Debt: borrowings were ₹4.9 crore at March 31, 2026, of which ₹4.6 crore was owed to the promoters and their mothers, repayable on demand (DRHP p.56, DRHP p.205). Debt to equity was 0.13 times, about 0.1× (DRHP p.215). Cash and bank balances were ₹4.6 crore, so borrowings net of cash were ₹0.26 crore (our arithmetic, DRHP p.201). Return on capital employed was 25.32%, so 25.3% rounded (DRHP p.98).
• Customers and suppliers: the largest customer was 12.68% of FY26 revenue, so 12.7% rounded (DRHP p.135), and the top ten 75.47%, so 75.5% rounded (DRHP p.135); the top five were 48.13% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.135). The top ten suppliers were 91.28% of FY26 purchases, so 91.3% rounded (DRHP p.28).
• Exports were 89.79% of FY26 revenue, so 89.8% rounded (DRHP p.29).
• Working capital: receivable days were 30, 75 and 59 in FY24, FY25 and FY26, and working capital days 15, 51 and 53 (DRHP p.89, DRHP p.33).
• Order book: ₹108.1 crore of orders were outstanding at September 5, 2026, mostly for export (DRHP p.29).
• Contingent liabilities: TDS demands of about ₹3,000 at March 31, 2026 (DRHP p.60).
• Related-party transactions FY26: director remuneration of ₹0.48 crore and fresh loans of ₹0.84 crore from the two promoters (DRHP p.61).
• Industry: the company is a trader of ferro alloys and manganese ore, which serve the steel industry (DRHP p.128, DRHP p.36).

05What the growth is made of

Revenue fell ₹17.6 crore from FY24 to FY26, after falling ₹53.8 crore in FY25 and recovering ₹36.2 crore in FY26 (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57). Profit rose over the same years. The document explains each movement, and the explanations are about prices and costs rather than volume.

FY25, less revenue and more profit: purchases fell ₹69.5 crore as sales volume dropped, which the company ties to geopolitical tension (DRHP p.231).

Profit rose because the ₹13.1 crore of stock held at March 2024, bought at lower prices in the second half of FY24, was sold along with first-half purchases at higher prices when manganese ore prices rose sharply between June and September 2024; gross margin went from 16.79% to 18.36%, and the first half produced 68.81% of the year's profit (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.89).

Brokerage and commission also fell from ₹10.3 crore to ₹0.94 crore, because the company stopped selling through agents and dealt with buyers directly, cutting commission from 4.16% to 0.50% of export sales (DRHP p.231).

FY26, more revenue and less profit: revenue rose ₹36.2 crore, which the company attributes to more sales in Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, Singapore, Hong Kong and West Bengal and to higher revenue per customer (DRHP p.228, DRHP p.229). Profit fell because gross margin dropped to 15.80% as manganese prices normalised, and because of the ₹6.5 crore foreign exchange loss and ₹0.79 crore of interest for paying advance tax late (DRHP p.230, DRHP p.229). Freight fell from 7.40% to 5.71% of revenue (DRHP p.34).

Volume and price: the document gives no tonnes and no price per tonne for any year, so the change in revenue cannot be split into volume and price. That is the finding. What can be said is that average revenue per customer rose from ₹5.64 crore in FY24 to ₹7.95 crore in FY26 while the customer count fell from 44 to 29 (DRHP p.133).

06Earnings quality

The item that needs explaining is where profit went, since it did not arrive as operating cash. In FY25 receivables rose ₹18.3 crore as more shipments fell near the year end and key overseas buyers got longer credit (DRHP p.58, DRHP p.226). In FY26 receivables fell ₹3.8 crore but advances to suppliers rose from ₹3.6 crore to ₹14.3 crore, paid to secure material for export orders, and security deposits with SMIFs rose from ₹0.54 crore to ₹2.5 crore (DRHP p.202, DRHP p.200). The document does not say who or what SMIFs is. Income tax paid was ₹5.7 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.58).

Two balance sheet lines stand apart from the profit and loss account. Commission payable to export agents was ₹9.6 crore at March 2026, ₹8.7 crore at March 2025 and ₹13.3 crore at March 2024, while the commission expense was ₹1.0 crore in FY26 and ₹0.94 crore in FY25 (DRHP p.199, DRHP p.203). And 8.2% of March 2026 receivables, ₹3.1 crore, were more than six months past due, ₹3.0 crore of it between one and two years old; none is provided for (our arithmetic, DRHP p.201).

07The balance sheet

At March 31, 2026 total assets were ₹63.7 crore: trade receivables ₹37.3 crore, short-term loans and advances ₹17.1 crore, cash and bank balances ₹4.6 crore, other non-current assets ₹2.6 crore, inventories ₹0.81 crore, long-term advances ₹0.74 crore and fixed assets ₹0.43 crore (DRHP p.56, DRHP p.201). Against them: other current liabilities ₹13.2 crore, trade payables ₹4.9 crore, short-term borrowings ₹4.9 crore, a tax provision of ₹3.4 crore and net worth ₹37.3 crore (DRHP p.56).

Borrowings at March 31, 2026 by type: two car loans from HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank of ₹0.20 crore together, interest-free loans of ₹2.2 crore from Yash Vardhan Birla, ₹1.2 crore from Abhishek Birla, ₹0.76 crore from Sudha Birla and ₹0.42 crore from Madhu Birla, and ₹0.05 crore from three outside companies, all repayable on demand (DRHP p.236).

A ₹1.0 crore Standard Chartered Bank working capital line against a fixed deposit is sanctioned but undrawn (DRHP p.236). Two years earlier, at March 2024, ₹7.1 crore was owed to twelve outside companies at 9% to 10% (DRHP p.205). Contingent liabilities were about ₹3,000 of TDS demands (DRHP p.60). A ₹8.7 crore contract to acquire a warehouse was cancelled and the ₹0.74 crore advance refunded, so no capital commitments remain (DRHP p.206).

Source: DRHP p.56, DRHP p.88, DRHP p.211. None of the issue money goes to repaying debt, including the promoter loans, and the capitalisation statement leaves the post-issue column blank (DRHP p.250, DRHP p.211). The working capital plan assumes short-term borrowings of ₹2.7 crore in FY27 and ₹3.5 crore in FY28 alongside the issue money (DRHP p.89).

08What the money is for

Oremet Alloys And Castings IPO objects: what the money is for

Source: DRHP p.88, DRHP p.91. The fresh issue in rupees depends on a price not yet set, so each object's share cannot be worked out (DRHP p.1).

Working capital, ₹25.0 crore: ₹10.0 crore in FY27 and ₹15.0 crore in FY28, against a projected working capital need of ₹41.7 crore at March 2027 and ₹54.7 crore at March 2028, up from ₹33.7 crore at March 2026 (DRHP p.88, DRHP p.89).

The projection assumes receivable days of 60, inventory days of 2 and payable days of 9 in both years, and other current liabilities falling to 18 and 16 days as commissions are settled more promptly (DRHP p.89, DRHP p.90). The company says it pays suppliers early and in advance to secure material and price, and that this is why it needs the money (DRHP p.90).

The estimates have been verified by Jay Gupta & Associates (DRHP p.90).

The objects have not been appraised by any bank or financial institution, and no monitoring agency will be appointed because the fresh issue is below ₹50.0 crore; the board and audit committee will monitor use (DRHP p.93). ₹0.16 crore had been spent on the lead manager and legal counsel by the date of the document (DRHP p.93).

Into the business the whole fresh issue of up to 36,15,600 shares, at a price not yet set (DRHP p.1). To selling shareholders up to 5,14,800 shares, 12.46% of the offer, sold by the two promoters at a price not yet set (DRHP p.249).

09Who is selling

Oremet Alloys And Castings IPO offer for sale: who is selling

Source: DRHP p.249. The offer for sale totals up to 5,14,800 shares, 12.46% of the total offer of up to 41,30,400 shares (DRHP p.249, DRHP p.1). The weighted average cost of acquisition of each seller is ₹0.26 a share (DRHP p.1). The proceeds of the offer for sale go to the two promoters, net of their share of issue expenses, and the company receives none of it (DRHP p.87). The promoter group will not take part in the issue except through this offer for sale (DRHP p.86).

10Promoters

The promoters are Yash Vardhan Birla and Abhishek Birla (DRHP p.176), who hold 91.00% of the company before the issue; with the promoter group the holding is 100% (DRHP p.82). The document lists Sudha Birla as the mother and Satish Kumar Birla as the father of Yash Vardhan Birla, and Madhu Birla as the mother and Vijay Kumar Birla as the father of Abhishek Birla (DRHP p.179). Prachi Birla is the spouse of Yash Vardhan Birla and Surabhi Birla the spouse of Abhishek Birla (DRHP p.160). The document describes Aditya Vikram Birla as a cousin of the promoters who is not part of the promoter group (DRHP p.30).

Yash Vardhan Birla, aged 36, an MBA, is Managing Director from November 4, 2024 for five years and runs business planning, marketing and sales; Abhishek Birla, aged 34, an MBA, is Executive Director and, from November 4, 2024, Chief Financial Officer (DRHP p.159). Both joined the board in August 2021 (DRHP p.159).

The promoters chapter gives them 10 and 9 years of experience in metals and mining, while the director profiles give over five years in ferro alloys each (DRHP p.179, DRHP p.159). The company has no documentary evidence of the qualifications and experience of either promoter and relies on affidavits (DRHP p.41). Neither has been a director of a listed company (DRHP p.40).

Other businesses: Yash Vardhan Birla is a director of six other companies, including Topsell Vinimay Private Limited, Apollo Vinimay Private Limited and Innocent Vincom Private Limited, and Abhishek Birla of five (DRHP p.157). The document names Adarsh Technocom Private Limited, Cosmic Steels Private Limited, Manuhari Vincom Private Limited, Topsell Vinimay Private Limited and Apollo Vinimay Private Limited as ventures in the same line of business, and the company has signed non-compete agreements with all five (DRHP p.179, DRHP p.155).

Pay: each promoter was paid ₹0.24 crore in each of FY24, FY25 and FY26, so ₹0.48 crore a year for the two (DRHP p.139, DRHP p.61). The present terms are ₹0.24 crore a year each, with no bonus or profit share (DRHP p.161). Their spouses drew salaries of ₹0.24 crore each in FY24, ₹0.16 crore each in FY25 and ₹0.02 crore each in FY26 (DRHP p.61).

Loans to the company: the promoters lend the company money, interest free and repayable on demand: ₹2.2 crore from Yash Vardhan Birla and ₹1.2 crore from Abhishek Birla at March 31, 2026, with ₹1.2 crore more from their mothers (DRHP p.236).

Pledges and guarantees: no promoter shares are pledged (DRHP p.81). The document refers to the statement of financial indebtedness for promoter guarantees, and the borrowings listed there are car loans and an undrawn line against a deposit (DRHP p.154, DRHP p.236).

Cases: Yash Vardhan Birla and Abhishek Birla, and promoter group members Madhu Birla and Sudha Birla, each received a police notice dated July 16, 2025 to appear for investigation at Vasai Police Station over a complaint by Rakesh Vasant Salve that 2,44,875 shares of Raft Motors Limited were transferred using forged documents (DRHP p.238). No first information report has been registered, no further notice received and the amount is not quantifiable; the promoters deny any connection and say the complaint is mainly against Aditya Vikram Birla (DRHP p.238, DRHP p.30). Neither promoter has a tax proceeding (DRHP p.240).

Promoter economics: the average cost of the promoters' shares is ₹0.26 each (DRHP p.82). Each promoter took 4,500 shares at ₹310 in a rights issue on March 24, 2022, ₹0.14 crore each, and then received 7,73,500 bonus shares in March 2024 and 46,68,288 bonus shares in December 2024 (DRHP p.81). In September 2024 they gifted a few shares to Prachi Birla, Surabhi Birla and Archana Birla (DRHP p.81). No shares have been bought, sold or transferred by the promoters, promoter group or directors in the six months before filing (DRHP p.82), and there has been no primary issue in the 18 months before filing other than bonus shares (DRHP p.99).

11Who already owns it

Oremet Alloys And Castings promoter holding before and after the IPO

Source: DRHP p.82. There are 1,19,70,000 shares of ₹10 before the issue, held by seven shareholders, all promoter and promoter group (DRHP p.54, DRHP p.82). There is no outside shareholder, no fund and no employee holder (DRHP p.79). The document leaves the after-issue holding blank until the price is fixed (DRHP p.82).

If all 36,15,600 new shares are issued and all 5,14,800 offered shares sold, the total becomes 1,55,85,600 shares; the promoters' 91.00% becomes about 66.6%, so 91.0% → 66.6% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.82), and promoters with the promoter group go from 100% to about 73.5%, so 100.0% → 73.5% (our arithmetic, DRHP p.82). The 10,77,328 shares held by the promoter group other than the promoters will be locked in for one year from allotment, and 20% of the post-issue capital held by the promoters for three years (DRHP p.84, DRHP p.82).

The original subscribers in September 2020 were Madhu Birla, Sudha Birla and Anurag Moondra, with 450, 450 and 100 shares (DRHP p.77, DRHP p.78). In April 2023 each promoter took 50 shares by transfer from Anurag Moondra at no price (DRHP p.81).

12What changed just before the IPO

• Revenue and profit: revenue went from ₹248.2 crore in FY24 to ₹230.6 crore in FY26, and profit after tax from ₹9.3 crore to ₹10.0 crore (DRHP p.57).
• Receivables went from 30 days in FY24 to 59 days in FY26, after 75 in FY25 (DRHP p.89).
• Promoter pay was ₹0.48 crore in FY24 and ₹0.48 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.139).
• Selling model: from FY25 the company stopped selling through agents, and commission fell from ₹10.3 crore to under ₹1.1 crore a year (DRHP p.231, DRHP p.203).
• Customers and markets: the customer count fell from 46 to 29 in FY26, and Egypt rose to 28.31% of revenue (DRHP p.133, DRHP p.134). Domestic sales in West Bengal rose to ₹23.6 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.202).
• Outside loans repaid: borrowings from outside companies went from ₹7.1 crore at March 2024 to ₹0.05 crore at March 2026, and interest on unsecured loans fell to nil in FY26 (DRHP p.199, DRHP p.203).
• Bonus issues: 170:1, allotted March 30, 2024, 17,00,000 shares, and 6:1, allotted December 30, 2024, 1,02,60,000 shares, the last allotment before the IPO, with no price paid (DRHP p.77, DRHP p.78).
• Share split: none appears in the share capital history; every allotment is at a face value of ₹10 (DRHP p.77).
• Last cash allotment: the rights issue of 9,000 shares at ₹310 a share on March 24, 2022 (DRHP p.77).
• Public company: converted with a fresh certificate dated November 27, 2024 (DRHP p.64).
• Auditor change: Vijay Bhushan Agarwal & Associates left on April 2, 2025 because it was not peer reviewed, and Jay Gupta & Associates was appointed on May 15, 2025 to fill the vacancy (DRHP p.73).
• Board: Yash Vardhan Birla became Managing Director and Abhishek Birla Chief Financial Officer on November 4, 2024; Prachi Birla and Surabhi Birla joined as non-executive directors on November 11, 2024, and two independent directors on December 27, 2024 (DRHP p.164, DRHP p.159). A company secretary joined on September 2, 2025 (DRHP p.61).
• Object clause: the memorandum was changed on July 14, 2026 to name ferro alloys trading as a main object, after BSE Limited returned an earlier draft in part because the principal business was not in the main objects (DRHP p.154, DRHP p.252).
• Earlier filings: a draft prospectus dated March 30, 2025 for BSE SME was withdrawn on June 5, 2025, and a second dated June 26, 2025 was returned by BSE Limited on November 21, 2025 (DRHP p.252).
• Registered office: a resolution of June 8, 2026 moves it from Ajmer to Kolkata, pending approval (DRHP p.152).
• Advance tax: FY2024-25 advance tax of ₹5.7 crore was paid on December 9, 2025 with ₹0.79 crore of interest, and FY2025-26 advance tax had not been paid by the date of the document (DRHP p.33).

13Capacity and expansion

The company makes nothing, so it has no installed capacity and the document says capacity utilisation does not apply (DRHP p.140). What it uses instead:

Source: DRHP p.138. The Howrah branch lease from Cosmic Engineers, a related party, ends on October 13, 2026 (DRHP p.138, DRHP p.208). The company does not own any warehouse and says it intends to own one near a port in future (DRHP p.137). The issue funds no capital expenditure (DRHP p.88). The chain that matters here is not capacity but working capital → tonnes bought and shipped → revenue, and the document gives no tonnes at any step.

14Market size and industry structure

Oremet Alloys And Castings industry: market size and growth

As claimed: there is no commissioned industry report. The company says it did not commission one and built the "Our Industry" chapter from publicly available data on the internet, including the IMF World Economic Outlook of July 2026, the RBI Bulletin of August 2026, the Indian Bureau of Mines, BigMint, the Indian Ferro Alloy Producers' Association (IFAPA) and news reports (DRHP p.43, DRHP p.44).

The chapter never sizes the ferro alloys market, the silico manganese market or the trading business in rupees or dollars. The nearest figures are physical: India's ferro alloys manufacturing capacity was 8.0 million tonnes in FY2024-25 and domestic consumption 3.4 million tonnes, from BigMint data cited by the IFAPA chairman (DRHP p.117).

The part that is addressable: the company trades silico manganese and ferro manganese bought in West Bengal and shipped mostly abroad (DRHP p.35, DRHP p.140). The chapter says India is the world's largest exporter of manganese alloys and that silico manganese has consistently been the largest single part of India's ferro alloys export value, ahead of ferro manganese (DRHP p.118, DRHP p.119). Its chart of export value, as we read the figures printed with it, puts silico manganese at about US$680 million in FY2020-21, US$1,523 million in FY2021-22 and US$1,470 million in FY2022-23 (DRHP p.119). That data is from June 2023 and stops at FY2022-23.

What the company is today: FY26 revenue of ₹230.6 crore, ₹207.1 crore of it exports (DRHP p.57, DRHP p.202). It cannot be set against a market figure for FY26 because the chapter gives none for that year.

Size over time: the chapter tracks inputs and steel rather than its own market. India's ferro alloys capacity nearly doubled from 4.3 million tonnes in FY2019-20 to 8.0 million tonnes in FY2024-25 while consumption rose from 2.8 to 3.4 million tonnes, which the chapter reads as capacity built to export (DRHP p.117).

Manganese ore output rose 11.8% to 3.8 million tonnes in FY2024-25, and consumption rose 18% to 8.85 million tonnes in FY2023-24 (DRHP p.114, DRHP p.115). India's crude steel output went from 110 million tonnes in FY2019-20 to 143.6 million tonnes in FY2023-24 (DRHP p.120). The National Steel Policy, 2017 sets a target of 300 million tonnes of capacity by FY2030-31, which the chapter itself labels a policy target, not production (DRHP p.120).

The IMF projects global growth of 3.0% in 2026 and 3.4% in 2027, and India's at 6.4% for 2026 in a table presented on a fiscal year basis (DRHP p.107, DRHP p.108). These are the sources' claims.

Segments: the chapter splits ferro alloys into bulk alloys (manganese alloys, ferrochrome, ferrosilicon) and noble alloys such as ferromolybdenum and ferrovanadium (DRHP p.118, DRHP p.119). Silico manganese, 60% to 70% manganese and 14% to 17% silicon, goes mainly into long steel such as rebar and wire rod, and high-carbon ferro manganese into structural and long steel (DRHP p.118). The company sells only those two bulk manganese alloys (DRHP p.35). Ferrochrome, much of the chapter's detail, is a segment the company does not trade.

What drives demand: almost all ferro alloy demand comes from steel making (DRHP p.120). The chapter names construction and infrastructure as the largest driver, because long steel uses the most manganese alloy, then cars, capital goods and railways (DRHP p.120).

It points to India's per-capita finished steel use of about 108 kg in FY2024-25 against a world average of about 215 kg, the specialty steel production-linked incentive scheme with a ₹6,322 crore outlay, and buyers moving supply away from China (DRHP p.125, DRHP p.124). The company's own buyers are mostly abroad, in Egypt, Singapore, Malaysia and elsewhere, so Indian steel demand reaches it mainly through its 10.21% domestic sales (DRHP p.134).

Structure: IFAPA has 88 members, and the chapter describes a few large integrated producers with a long tail of small, often family-run smelters, the manganese alloy side being the more fragmented: Maithan Alloys, among the larger listed makers, holds just over 5% of the domestic industry (DRHP p.124, DRHP p.125).

The producers it names are Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys (IMFA), Maithan Alloys, Nava Limited, Balasore Alloys, Tata Steel, Shyam Metalics, Sarda Energy & Minerals, FACOR and Rohit Ferro-Tech (DRHP p.124). These are makers, not traders; the chapter names no trading company. The business chapter says the trade has manufacturers, traders, importers and exporters, organised and unorganised, competing on sourcing price, quality, relationships and delivery time (DRHP p.139).

Inputs and trade: for smelters, power is 40% to 70% of production cost by IFAPA's account, and Indian ferrochrome power costs run about four times South Africa's (DRHP p.116). Indian manganese ore is lower grade than ore from Gabon or South Africa, so producers blend in imports: 5.45 million tonnes of the 8.85 million tonnes consumed in FY2023-24 was imported (DRHP p.115).

Prices are set by published assessments, BigMint above all, not by an exchange; in Q1 2026 silico manganese prices rose globally while India's gains were held back by its fragmented supply (DRHP p.121, DRHP p.122). The company buys only in India in rupees and sells mostly in dollars, so it carries the exchange rate between the two (DRHP p.234).

Rules: manganese is now a critical mineral under the MMDR Amendment Act, 2023, so mining leases are auctioned by the Centre (DRHP p.122). Smelters need pollution consents and waste authorisations (DRHP p.123). As a trader the company needs an importer-exporter code, GST registrations, shop and establishment certificates and trade licences, which it holds; its trademark application is under objection (DRHP p.245, DRHP p.246). Export cargoes usually need mill test certificates and, for many buyers, independent pre-shipment inspection (DRHP p.118).

What the chapter says can go wrong: Indian power cost increases; dependence on imported manganese ore and the freight and currency swings that come with it; lower global steel output, trade barriers and safeguard duties at a time when Indian capacity has outgrown domestic use; carbon border taxes such as the EU's CBAM; and Chinese overcapacity capping prices (DRHP p.125, DRHP p.126, DRHP p.123). The chapter adds that downturns tend to squeeze producers' margins rather than collapse alloy prices (DRHP p.122).

15Competitive position

Oremet Alloys And Castings competitors

Source: DRHP p.99, DRHP p.98, DRHP p.56, converted from ₹ lakh. The document gives QVC Exports' net worth, ₹52.9 crore, and its EBITDA margin of 1.18% in FY26, but not its borrowings (DRHP p.99). The producers named in the industry chapter are not compared in numbers anywhere (DRHP p.124).

What the company puts forward: quick delivery from port-side stock under its Just-in-Time model, a three-stage independent inspection system with NABL or QAI accredited agencies, ISO 9001:2015 certification, relationships with suppliers and buyers, and exports to about 28 countries over three years (DRHP p.136, DRHP p.135, DRHP p.137).

Against that: it has no long-term contracts with customers or suppliers and no formal agreements with its inspection agencies or transporters, it owns no warehouse, all its suppliers and both ports are in West Bengal, and it had eight employees (DRHP p.28, DRHP p.40, DRHP p.34, DRHP p.137, DRHP p.29, DRHP p.139). The document says competitors may have more financial, marketing or other resources (DRHP p.42).

16Peers the company named

Peers named in the offer document: QVC Exports Limited (DRHP p.97).

The document says the peer is not strictly comparable given the nature and size of the business and is included for broad comparison (DRHP p.97). QVC Exports is about 1.9 times the company's FY26 revenue, with a PAT margin of 0.66% against 4.33% and a return on equity of 7.33% against 30.92% (DRHP p.99, our arithmetic).

Its revenue went from ₹446.0 crore in FY24 to ₹358.8 crore in FY25 and ₹440.3 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.99). The document prints its P/E as 9.56 on the March 31, 2026 price and its closing price as ₹24.00 on September 25, 2026 (DRHP p.97, DRHP p.96). The company's FY26 EPS is ₹8.35 (DRHP p.97). With no price band, no P/E for the company can be stated.

17Risks, in plain words

Oremet Alloys And Castings IPO risks

Business: price and margin: profit depends on the gap between buying and selling price, gross margin was 16.79%, 18.36% and 15.80% over three years, and FY25's higher profit came from stock bought before a price rise (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.230) → a few points of margin decide the year's profit on a thin base → profit after tax rose 51.51% in FY25 on lower revenue and fell 29.28% in FY26 on higher revenue (DRHP p.232, DRHP p.230).

Financial: currency: sales are billed mostly in dollars while purchases are in rupees, and hedging is decided case by case by management (DRHP p.234, DRHP p.31) → a currency move between sale and payment goes straight to profit → the FY26 net foreign exchange loss was ₹6.5 crore, against FY26 EBITDA of ₹10.9 crore (DRHP p.203, DRHP p.98).

Customers: the top ten customers were 75.47% of FY26 revenue and the largest 12.68%, with no long-term contracts (DRHP p.28) → losing one or two buyers moves revenue by a tenth or more → the customer count was 29 in FY26 (DRHP p.133).

Suppliers: the top ten suppliers were 91.28% of FY26 purchases and the largest 23.41%, all in West Bengal, none under contract (DRHP p.28, DRHP p.140) → the company makes nothing itself, so a supplier problem is a supply problem → advances to suppliers were ₹14.3 crore at March 2026 (DRHP p.202).

Business: one region: suppliers, warehouses, offices and both export ports, Haldia and Kolkata, are in West Bengal (DRHP p.29) → a local disruption stops the whole business → exports were 89.79% of FY26 revenue (DRHP p.29).

Business: export markets: country mix swings widely, the UK going from 17.95% of revenue to 4.92% in two years and Egypt from 7.82% to 28.31% (DRHP p.134) → revenue rests on a handful of countries in any one year → FY25 revenue fell 21.67% when European and Middle Eastern sales dropped (DRHP p.230).

Financial: cash and working capital: three years of profit added up to ₹33.4 crore while operating cash flow added up to ₹0.56 crore (our arithmetic, DRHP p.57, DRHP p.58) → profit is being held in receivables, supplier advances and deposits → working capital days rose from 15 to 53 (DRHP p.33).

Financial: promoter loans on demand: ₹4.6 crore of the ₹4.9 crore of borrowings is owed to the promoters and their mothers, repayable on demand (DRHP p.205) → a demand for repayment would draw on cash → cash and bank balances were ₹4.6 crore at March 2026 (DRHP p.201).

Regulation and compliance: TDS was paid up to 142 days late, professional tax up to 105 days late, FY2024-25 advance tax paid in December 2025 with ₹0.79 crore of interest, FY2025-26 advance tax not yet paid, and car loan charges not registered on time (DRHP p.32, DRHP p.33) → regulators may levy penalties → the document says none has been levied so far apart from late filing fees (DRHP p.34).

Promoters: police notice: both promoters and two promoter group members received police notices in July 2025 over alleged forged share transfers in another company, and the complainant also wrote to SEBI and the exchanges about an earlier draft offer document (DRHP p.30) → an adverse development could delay the offer or affect reputation → no first information report has been registered and no amount is quantified (DRHP p.238).

Issue-specific: the promoters' average cost is ₹0.26 a share, and no shares have been issued for cash since a ₹310 rights issue in March 2022 (DRHP p.82, DRHP p.77) → the offer price will be the first price set for the shares by outsiders → there are no outside shareholders before the issue (DRHP p.82).

18Litigation and regulatory matters

Cases against Oremet Alloys And Castings and its promoters

Criminal: none by or against the company, its directors, key managerial personnel or group companies; the only criminal matter is the police notice to the promoters (DRHP p.237, DRHP p.238, DRHP p.239). Regulatory: no actions by statutory or regulatory authorities against the company, promoters or directors, and no SEBI or exchange disciplinary action (DRHP p.238). Civil: no material civil litigation, the threshold being ₹0.56 crore (DRHP p.237). Tax: the company has two TDS matters totalling about ₹3,000, the promoters and directors none, and Topsell Vinimay Private Limited, of which both promoters are directors, two demands totalling ₹9.6 crore recorded as correct and collectible (DRHP p.240, DRHP p.241, DRHP p.183).

The complaint to the regulators: on July 25, 2025 the same complainant wrote to BSE, NSE and SEBI alleging that the company's draft prospectus of June 26, 2025 did not disclose the summons, and making allegations of forgery, misuse of issue proceeds, market manipulation and misuse of the insolvency process against Aditya Vikram Birla, Cosmic CRF Limited and Cosmic Ferro Alloys Limited (DRHP p.30).

The complaint also refers to a corporate guarantee said to have been given by Archana Impex Private Limited, a promoter group company, for borrowings of Cosmic Ferro Alloys Limited (DRHP p.30). The company denied the allegations on July 28, 2025 (DRHP p.30). These are allegations recorded in the document, not findings. Archana Impex Private Limited had lent the company ₹1.1 crore at March 2024, repaid by March 2025 (DRHP p.205).

Corporate records: the company records discrepancies in its filings with the Registrar of Companies, including charges on car loans from ICICI Bank not registered on time, and says no penalty or show cause notice has followed (DRHP p.33, DRHP p.34).

19Related-party transactions

Source: DRHP p.61, converted from ₹ lakh. Interest was paid to Apollo Vinimay Pvt. Ltd., PD Infra Pvt. Ltd., Manuhari Vincom Pvt. Ltd. and PSD Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. in FY24 and FY25 but not in FY26 (DRHP p.61, DRHP p.62). In FY24 there were small trading transactions with group entities: purchases of ₹0.20 crore from PD Infra Pvt. Ltd. and ₹0.19 crore from Adarsh Technocom Pvt.

Ltd., and sales of ₹0.37 crore to Maxworth Industries (DRHP p.62). Cosmic Engineers was paid ₹0.12 crore for loading and unloading in FY24 and rent of ₹36,000 a year (DRHP p.62). Vijay Kumar Birla drew a salary of ₹0.09 crore in FY24 (DRHP p.61).

At March 31, 2026 the company owed ₹2.2 crore to Yash Vardhan Birla, ₹1.2 crore to Abhishek Birla, ₹0.76 crore to Sudha Birla and ₹0.42 crore to Madhu Birla, interest free and repayable on demand, ₹4.6 crore in all (DRHP p.209, DRHP p.205). The loans from Sudha Birla and Madhu Birla have not moved since at least March 2024 (DRHP p.209).

What appeared or disappeared in the two years before filing: loans from group companies, which carried 9% interest, were repaid by March 2026 (DRHP p.205); Maxworth Industries placed a ₹0.53 crore security deposit in FY25, returned ₹0.12 crore in FY25 and ₹0.41 crore in FY26 (DRHP p.62); and salaries to the promoters' spouses fell from ₹0.48 crore together in FY24 to ₹0.04 crore in FY26, after both joined the board as non-executive directors (DRHP p.61, DRHP p.164). The company says all transactions were at arm's length (DRHP p.36).

20What the offer document does not say

Customers and suppliers are not named. Tonnes shipped, tonnes bought and price per tonne are not given for any year, so the earnings equation cannot be filled in and growth cannot be split into volume and price. The ferro alloys market is not sized in money anywhere in the industry chapter, and no trading competitor is named.

What SMIFs is, against which ₹2.5 crore of security deposits sit at March 2026, is not stated (DRHP p.200). Why commission payable stays near ₹9.6 crore while the yearly commission expense is about ₹1.0 crore is not explained (DRHP p.199, DRHP p.203). Hedging policy is described only as case by case, with no figure for open forward contracts (DRHP p.31).

The issue size in rupees, the price band, the general corporate purposes amount, the issue expenses, the market maker and the after-issue shareholding are blank (DRHP p.88, DRHP p.91, DRHP p.73, DRHP p.82). Financial details of the group companies are not in the document; it points to the company's website (DRHP p.181).

Some inconsistencies are recorded as document matters, not business ones: the abridged prospectus gives the top ten customers as 75.74% and 60.87% of FY26 and FY25 revenue against 75.47% and 60.37% in the DRHP (AP p.7, DRHP p.28); the abridged prospectus puts Italy at ₹4.6 crore in FY25 and ₹20.4 crore in FY24 against ₹4.4 crore and ₹20.2 crore in the DRHP (AP p.2, DRHP p.134);

the post-bonus FY24 EPS is printed as ₹54.53 on one page and ₹7.79 on another (DRHP p.95, DRHP p.212); the monitoring agency paragraph says the size of the offer “does may exceeds” the ₹50.0 crore threshold (DRHP p.68); the IMF table gives India's 2026 growth of 6.4% on a fiscal year basis while the next page calls 6.4% a calendar year figure (DRHP p.108, DRHP p.109);

the promoters' experience is 10 and 9 years in one chapter and over five years each in another (DRHP p.179, DRHP p.159); the employee benefits note gives headcount falling from 9 to 7 while the KPI table gives 7 rising to 9 (DRHP p.229, DRHP p.133);

and the industry chapter carries drafting notes saying its trade duty position and its BigMint, IFAPA and ISSDA data should be confirmed or refreshed before filing (DRHP p.123, DRHP p.126).

21Five questions for management

1. How many tonnes of silico manganese and ferro manganese were shipped in FY24, FY25 and FY26, and at what average price per tonne, so that revenue can be split into volume and price?
2. What was the open forward contract position at March 31, 2026, and how much of the ₹6.5 crore foreign exchange loss in FY26 came from hedges rather than from receivables?
3. Of the ₹9.6 crore of commission payable at March 31, 2026, how much relates to sales made before FY25, to whom is it owed, and when will it be paid?
4. What is SMIFs, why did security deposits with it rise from ₹0.54 crore to ₹2.5 crore in FY26, and are they recoverable on demand?
5. Of the ₹37.3 crore of receivables at March 31, 2026, how much has been collected since, and how much of the ₹3.1 crore more than six months overdue is owed by one buyer?

1Sources and cited facts

This study was read from 1 document the company filed. The 188 figures it cites are listed under the document each came from, with the page and the sentence as printed.