Gallantt Ispat Limited makes a corporate announcement

The pro-forma change cannot be quantified reliably from the cited filings. The available annual-report material does not provide the Scheme’s pre-appointed-date audited balance sheets for both Gallantt Metal Limited and Gallantt Ispat Limited, nor the assets, liabilities, equity and inter-company eliminations to be transferred under the demerger.

The available evidence instead relates to a later amalgamation, sanctioned by the NCLT on 22 May 2026, under which Gallantt Ispat Limited amalgamated with Gallantt Metal Limited and the surviving company adopted the Gallantt Ispat name.^[1] It is therefore not the pre-appointed-date demerger basis requested.

For reference, the FY2025-26 annual report reports a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.287x, but this is the reported ratio for that annual-report period and is not a demerger pro-forma ratio.^[2] The annual report also gives a net-worth figure, but the extracted table does not preserve the monetary unit, so it cannot be safely scaled or used in a pro-forma calculation.^[3]

The required calculation would be:

• Pro-forma debt-to-equity = post-scheme debt after transfer and eliminations ÷ post-scheme shareholders’ equity.
• Pro-forma net worth = post-scheme equity after recording the demerger consideration, reserves transferred, accounting adjustments and inter-company eliminations.

Accordingly, the defensible conclusion is: the direction and magnitude of the impact on consolidated debt-to-equity and net worth are not determinable from the cited audited financial information; the Scheme document and the latest pre-appointed-date audited financial statements of both entities are required.

The cited disclosures do not provide the specific share-swap ratios, a current NCLT approval schedule, or a post-approval record date for issuing new equity shares.

The company has issued a notice regarding an EOGM conducted through VC/OAVM, but the cited extract does not set out the Scheme’s exchange ratio or a subsequent NCLT-and-record-date timetable. ^[6] Therefore, the ratios and issuance timeline cannot be confirmed from the reported disclosures cited here.

Capacity: The post-merger entity is reported at approximately 1.0 MMTPA of finished-steel capacity, versus approximately 0.6 MMTPA for Gallantt Ispat’s standalone Gorakhpur platform—an implied increase of about 0.4 MMTPA, or 66.67% relative to that narrower base. ^[7] However, this is not a like-for-like comparison with Gallantt Ispat’s FY26 annual-report figure, which already reports 1.0 MMTPA across both Gorakhpur and Kutch units. ^[8] On the full two-unit annual-report basis, the disclosed figures therefore indicate no incremental finished-steel capacity, rather than a 66.67% increase.

The merger itself involved Gallantt Ispat Limited and Gallant Metal Limited, with the post-amalgamation entity retaining the Gallantt Ispat name. ^[9]

Captive-power efficiency: No quantified post-merger percentage improvement in captive-power consumption efficiency is disclosed. The operating integration plan instead points to:

• a 78 MW solar programme—18 MW for Gujarat and 60 MW for Uttar Pradesh—expected to generate annual savings of approximately Rs 30-40 Crores once operational; ^[10]
• energy-efficiency upgrades that are estimated to save 6,616,421 kWh per year across the soot-blower, air-preheater and cooling-tower projects. ^[11]

Thus, the defensible conclusion is: capacity uplift is 66.67% only against the Gorakhpur-only comparison cited in the merger coverage; against Gallantt’s full FY26 two-unit capacity, no uplift is established. The expected power benefit is lower energy cost and consumption, but the company has not provided a post-integration efficiency percentage or a comparable kWh-per-tonne target.