Manaksia Coated Metals & Industries Limited moves to reshape its capital structure

The issuance of 11,999,847 shares represents 11.2533% dilution relative to the existing share base. Existing shares are 106,634,050, so the post-issue share count would be 118,633,897.

Dilution calculation

• Existing shares: 106,634,050
• New shares: 11,999,847
• Post-issue shares: 118,633,897
• New shares / existing shares: 11,999,847 ÷ 106,634,050 = 11.2533%
• New shares / post-issue shares: 11,999,847 ÷ 118,633,897 = 10.1150%

The distinction matters: 11.2533% is the increase in the equity base, while existing shareholders’ ownership percentage falls by 10.1150%, from 100% to 89.8850%, assuming they do not participate.

Pro-forma TTM EPS

The latest TTM period is Q3 FY26 through Q2 FY27. Consolidated PAT for these four quarters was:

• Q3 FY26: ₹7.35 Cr ^[1]
• Q4 FY26: ₹5.37 Cr ^[2]
• Q1 FY27: ₹14.10 Cr ^[3]
• Q2 FY27: ₹18.73 Cr ^[4]

TTM PAT = ₹45.55 Cr, derived from the four reported quarterly PAT figures.

Assuming:

1. the full 11,999,847 shares are issued and outstanding for the pro-forma calculation; 2. TTM PAT remains unchanged; and 3. no earnings contribution is attributed to the new capital,

Implication: on a no-incremental-earnings basis, TTM EPS would decline from approximately ₹4.2716 to ₹3.8395, a reduction of 10.1150%. The calculation is mechanical; the eventual dilution would be lower if the funds raised generate additional PAT.

The specific QIP allocation could not be confirmed for FY27: the cited material does not establish how net proceeds are split between debt reduction, working capital, and planned capital expenditure.

Accordingly, whether the QIP fully funds the stated capacity-expansion roadmap also could not be confirmed. A funding sufficiency assessment would require both the net-proceeds allocation and the roadmap’s total planned project cost; neither is established in the cited evidence.

The QIP was priced at ₹125 per share, versus the SEBI floor price of ₹127.01, implying a ₹2.01 discount, or 1.58% below the floor. ^[5]

The issue was reported as fully subscribed, which indicates that institutional demand was sufficient to absorb the offered shares at the discounted price. ^[6] However, “fully subscribed” does not establish strong oversubscription: the multiple of bids received and the detailed order book were not reported in the cited material.

Valuation read: the subscription outcome is neutral-to-positive for institutional appetite, but it cannot be linked conclusively to the company’s current P/B valuation. A full subscription shows acceptance of the ₹125 entry price; it does not prove that institutions considered the stock inexpensive on book value, particularly because the price was below the regulatory floor.

A current P/B comparison could not be confirmed because no current market price or reported P/B multiple is available in the cited data. The correct conclusion is therefore: adequate institutional demand at a modest discount, but no evidence to determine whether that demand represented conviction at the company’s current P/B valuation.