Refused to commit on coppertech s1 filing vrl.

On demerger - as we have classified the businesses as discontinued operations in the financial statements, is it fair to say that all the approvals and name transfer on the assets are in place for demerger to go through?

The entire demerger accounting follows the Indian accounting regulation, specifically IND AS 103 and 105. Under that guidelines, in case the demerger is more likely over the next 12-months, then you have to account the way we have accounted. We have to work through a couple of CPs and other statutory approvals. But as earlier mentioned, we are committed and confident making the 1st April as the date on which demerger becomes effective.

On aluminum hot metal cost - alumina cost is still at $800 per ton, the cost of alumina production is higher than the market price (~$300 international). What would be the mix of captive production versus imports going ahead? Is there any incentive for increasing captive production at all?

On captive mix, as we are ramping up Lanjigarh, we did about 800 KT in Q3, and expecting 900 KT plus in Q4. That means 60% captive in Q3, 70% in Q4, and going forward Q1/Q2 should be 80%. On alumina cost at $800, on bought-out alumina, in the pricing month we lock in the LME. With LME in surge, we are not getting the benefit we had intended. Q3 LME was closer to 2,600, now 2,800, and as we speak closer to 3,100. Last time we said you will see a $50 lower cost QoQ; what we are seeing is $20-$22 in Q3, maybe $25 in Q4. Probably as we go into Q1, you will see a cost sub-$750. But the main driver remains captive, and we will be closer to 80% as we go into Q1.

Follow up - what is the contract as a percentage of your total alumina consumption that is related to LME price of aluminum?

Be it API, be it LME, whenever we are buying, whenever that material is getting priced, we lock in the LME. So that has been our policy.

On aluminum capacities for production - how much do we see the 600-plus KT additions, let us say in a year from today?

Rajiv: We are just now at 20-pots in the new 435 KT smelter at BALCO. We intend to increase to about 1 lakh ton by this March end, and then next three to six months we will ramp up the rest of the pots. There are 304 pots divided into four zones; the first set of 76 pots would be online by March and the rest of the numbers would be on in the next three to six months. Deshnee: We will get to 2.8 million tons of aluminum post our BALCO project ramp up. The team is working on debottlenecking exercises to close the gap from 2.8 to 3 million tons, which is what we have guided over the next 18-months. Lanjigarh refining will get up to 5 million tons - we are already close to those run rates. In addition there is a margin uplift via VAP projects at both BALCO and Jharsuguda.

In power, where do we see capacity in a couple of years or three years - how do we see that ramping up?

Rajinder: This year we have commissioned around 1.6 gigawatt of capacity at Athena, Meenakshi. Total capacity as of now up and running is 4.2 gigawatt. This is expected to go to around 4.8 gigawatt by end of H1 of next year. As we demerge, we really want to be a growth company and ride India's growth story on energy. So we have a plan in place to put additional 10 to 12 gigawatt. This company will be on continuous growth chart for the next five to seven years as India needs more thermal power capacity. Deshnee: The focus right now is to get us to the 5 gigawatts as soon as possible, and to tie up most of that into contracts as we did with Athena and Meenakshi PPAs.

On hedging volumes - what proportion is hedged for 4th Quarter and mainly for FY27 across divisions (aluminum, silver, zinc)? And what is our hedging policy/strategy?

Hedging policy is dynamic; we map the market impact on real-time basis with a global expert at Vedanta advising the Vedanta Risk Committee. Silver hedging for current fiscal is about 68 tons (~10% volume); additionally about 50 tons (~7%) for next year - total 17% hedged at avg ~$45 per troy ounce. Zinc hedging is almost 53KT each for Q4 and next year, so ~100KT, ~9% for full fiscal, at avg price ~$3,000 per ton across Q4 and next year. Aluminum: 8% (~185 KT) for Q4, and ~490 KT (18%) for next year, net-net 26% quantity hedged for aluminum at avg ~2,650. In summary, about 8% for current fiscal and 18% for next year hedged.

Can you give FY27 hedge prices - average price for 4th Quarter and FY27 specifically?

For next year the numbers are slightly higher. Silver at about $55 per ton (sic, troy ounce) with quantity 48 tons exactly. Zinc 43 tons at price ~3,072. Aluminum about 18% (~490 KT) at pricing of ~2,625.

On aluminum cost - what changes are we expecting over the next one or two quarters? And from BALCO smelter, what ramp-up schedule can we expect over FY27, what utilization could we achieve in FY27 on an average?

In Q3 hot metal cost reduced by 8% compared to last quarter. While answering alumina, I had guided next quarter alumina cost will be lower ~$25. We have planned maintenance of one of our bigger power plant units and there you will see a higher cost - both will offset each other. So next quarter, broadly costs will remain flat at constant LME, maybe half a percent here and there due to inflationary pressure on carbon commodity. Coming to Quarter 1, with ramp-up in Lanjigarh and bauxite expected from Sijimali, we believe we should have a $50-$60 cost reduction compared to where we are today.

Any new deleveraging targets for both Vedanta Resources and India given the cash flows and commodity prices?

Overall what we committed last time at VRL level - almost half a billion deleveraging, and given the current OFS in play, another half a billion. So roughly about 0.8 to 1 billion will be deleveraging across the group in the current fiscal. With that, VEDL India debt will come down by almost 0.7 billion in the current year and almost 300 at VRL level. At Vedanta India we track debt-to-EBITDA - compared to 1.23x as of 3rd Quarter, we will be closing the fiscal at about 1x, the lowest in the last many years.

On alumina - you mentioned we try to purchase alumina at a percentage to LME. Since our alumina production is increasing, do you think for FY27 we cannot go for spot basis because as a percentage of LME we are not getting any benefit? In fact Q3 purchase alumina cost seems higher than Q2 and will continue to go higher because of aluminum price. Cannot we go for spot purchase or is it not available?

Last time I had said we had some LME-linked contracts. As we go into the next financial, most of our contracts are API-linked - that is the alumina price index, not LME-linked. In the pricing month we lock in be it API, be it LME. There is a 45-to-60-day lag. In a LME rising scenario (~10% rising two months) you see that gap. If the LME was constant you could have seen almost a $40-45 reduction in alumina this and next quarter. So at some point in constant LME you will see that big gain. But LME-linked contracts are almost not there for the next financial year, very small quantity.

Is it safe to say that from Q1 FY27, when we expect $50-$60 fall in hot metal cost, the entire/maximum alumina purchase is API-linked, not aluminum price-linked?

Anup: Yes, that is the official point. On a constant LME (something I mentioned), keep that in mind. Deshnee: Price is API-linked. Consumption in the month would be LME-linked. That is just the way we account for it.

On Kuraloi coal block (which we are saying we will start in Q4) - have we received all regulatory clearances? And on Sijimali, we have received stage-I forest clearance but need local body clearances - how comfortable are we starting before monsoon this year?

On Kuraloi, we got FC stage-I on 12 May 2025 and FC stage-II on 12 January 2026, and CTO and approvals (mine lease opening, escrow account opening) are running in parallel. We have already put in the MDO, the team is on ground, we have shifted offices in that area, and we are very hopeful of commissioning the Kuraloi mine by Q4 FY26 (as guided). On Sijimali, FC stage-I was obtained on 31-12-2025, EC expected by February '26; we are hopeful of operationalising in the monsoon month. On Ghogharpalli, mine plan already approved, public hearing completed in January '26, EC expected by May '26, FC by July '26 - we will stick to that commissioning. We are in control and last leg of approvals on Kuraloi and operationalising Sijimali by Q1 FY27.

On timeline - we are still showing power business as under continuing operations. Are you confident that we should be able to get all requisite approvals before March/April for the full demerger to be effective?

The bigger demerger (four businesses) NCLT order came on December 16th, which falls within Q3 (October-December). The NCLT order for power in fact came on January 9th, an event post balance sheet date, hence power is part of operations in continuation. In terms of approvals, we intend to demerge all four companies on the same day with target right now being 1st April. They will be all co-terminus on the same day.

From the perspective of valuing the individual businesses, how do we apportion the portion of debt among the various businesses to get a proper picture of the valuation?

Management is focused on carving out multiple balance sheets and debt allocation. When we went to the banker seeking NOC, debt allocation was broadly aligned with bankers as a precondition for granting NOC for demerger approval. Broadly the net debt in Vedanta India consol at about 6.7 billion gets apportioned in the ratio of assets each entity will carry post demerger. One more dimension is each entity's cash generation and debt servicing capability. In summary, a significant portion of debt out of 6.7 billion will go to aluminum, some to power and the remainder Vedanta. Oil & gas post demerger will practically be debt-free and a very small debt in iron and steel. By end of this March, recasted balance sheets, P&L and debt allocation will be finalized.

On oil and gas - we are adding some reserves but production continues to decline. With new fields getting added, is there some probability that this can increase going ahead?

The main reason volumes are not coming to the level expected is delay of the ASP project commissioning - enhanced oil recovery, one of the largest in the world and very expensive technology. We are about to finalize commissioning and pick up first volumes in the next three months. Tight oil reserves are being converted - intensive recompletion strategy and new drilling will pick up from existing 8,000 to 15,000. These two buckets will stabilize the decline towards sustainable production and slowly picking up an increase towards 90,000. We discovered confirmed reserves on the largest scale in offshore shallow Ambe - that project will be commissioned and start up in FY27 Q4 with first stable production rate around 15,000 in March next year. On the Northeast biggest prospect SP-I, we are in continual delay; we hope to commission end of this March and then drill two to three wells which will discover potential volumes of up to 100 million reserves. We have additional projects - heavy oil Rajasthan north, infill on south satellite fields, east coast onshore to offshore drilling that may increase reserves by 15 million additionally. We expect next year to stabilize and grow to at least 90,000, and year after the year, reaching our ultimate target of 150,000.

As part of the demerger, there is some guarantee to be provided for the arbitration dispute. Would that be at the Vedanta Limited primary company level, or at the oil company level?

That has already been dealt with at the current structure. When we demerge that will be without the obligation sitting at the entity level.

We had certain outgo commitment with respect to interest in ICL. Any update on that? We were expecting some payout to fund that - has it been taken care of, and how was it funded?

All of the ICL is on track as committed/contracted. Out of a billion ICL advanced in 2019, 417 million remains outstanding; practically 200 million is due on Jan 31, balance 200 million sometime in Q1 (end of May). Out of 200 million ICL due in January, 50 million we have prepaid in December, so 150 million now remains pending in January and balance 200 million in May. The entire ICL 350 million will be paid on time.

I did not get the Rs.3,000 crores number, sir.

The OFS for zinc right now - we are looking at almost 1.1% as bidding both by retail and institution got closed at 230. It is about a 1.1% stake sale and that is Rs.3,000 crores broadly. The entire amount will be used for de-leveraging.

In notes-to-accounts, we have mentioned a claim of $512 million. How should we look into this - under which entity will this fall and how should we look at this variable going forward?

Ajay: That is an ongoing matter with the MoPNG. It pertains to oil and gas, and the matter is in arbitration. In fact, all the judgments in the past have been in Vedanta's favor. In our assessment, that matter is a medium to low risk. Arbitration is in play; next date of hearing is sometimes middle of March. Any accounting implications, gain or otherwise, will go in oil and gas business post-demerger. Deshnee: It is ring fenced to oil and gas, whatever the decision.

On Zinc International - how do we think about the cost in Q4 and next year?

Current cost levels have become higher for a couple of reasons. As we continue to do the waste stripping in the mine, we move some of those costs from capital into OPEX. Exchange rate in South Africa has not worked in our favor, contributing to dollar cost movements. We also have slightly higher TCRCs QoQ. Although Gamsberg planted very well at 50,000 in this quarter, our Black Mountain mine, because of the deep decline, is coming to end of its life - without Black Mountain tons and associated copper and silver byproduct, that has affected the overall cost structure. A good cost structure post ramp up of our Gamsberg project should be in the range of $1,100 to $1,200 per ton. That will be patchy as we ramp up and with headwinds from TCRCs and waste stripping moving into cost.

On interest cost - you mentioned Q4 balance interest payment is ~$125 million. Is that $400 million for FY27 and FY28?

From a VRL viewpoint - on the VRL requirement on maturities (principal and interest) for next fiscal: interest is almost 450 million for next fiscal at VRL on fully yearly basis. Principal: actual debt is 450 and ICL 200, so 650. Total 650 + 450 = ~1.1 billion. Debt servicing has two sources of cash for VRL - brand fee (~400 to 450) and the remainder - even if you pay 5% or lesser dividend, ~650. Net-net, as we have been saying, Vedanta Resources will be self-sufficient, self-funded with a 5% dividend and routine brand fee going forward.

On hedging - what was the aluminum hedge volume for this quarter and for next year?

Current quarter is almost 185 KT at a price of 2,640. For next year FY27, about 490 KT at pricing 2,625. So 185 and 490 KT next year, pricing roughly 2,625 on both cases.

Captive alumina target for Q1 FY27 is 80%, right?

Yes, Rashi, that is right.