Injecto Polymers
A distinct read of SME-specific danger (liquidity, concentration, forensic flags) — separate from the FinMinutes Score. Higher band = more caution warranted.
- Operating cash flows are deeply negative across all three years (-Rs. 48.80 crore in FY26) due to Rs. 140.22 crore inventory build-up.
- DGGI Kolkata issued a Rs. 21.27 crore Show Cause Notice for alleged fake invoices against promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria and group entity Hind Polyfabs.
- GST penalty of Rs. 0.61 crore paid in FY25 for stock mismatch between accounting records and physical inventory.
- Pending suo motu Section 454 adjudication for historical secretarial and Schedule III RPT non-disclosures.
- Unsecured loans from promoter group entities total Rs. 18.70 crore, all repayable on demand.
- Trading activities account for 50.36% of FY26 revenue from operations.
Educational risk signal grounded in the filing — not a buy/sell call.
First time with SME IPOs? Read the SME IPO guide and the risks before applying.
FinMinutes Deep Business Model & Edge
Injecto Polymers Limited is an ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 22000:2018 certified manufacturer of Polypropylene (PP) woven fabrics, PP woven sacks/bags, non-woven bags, and FIBC bags, alongside bulk trading of plastic granules and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) resins.
What this company actually does — full breakdown ▾
Incorporated in 1998, Injecto Polymers Limited is engaged in the manufacturing of Polypropylene (PP) woven fabrics, PP woven sacks/bags, FIBC bags, and non-woven bags, as well as bulk trading of plastic granules and PVC resins. The company operates two manufacturing units in West Bengal: Unit-I at Abujhati, Jamalpur (Purba Burdwan) with a covered area of 1,33,567 sq. ft., and Unit-II at Panchpara, Howrah (leased from group company Hind Polyfabs Private Limited). Combined installed manufacturing capacity across Unit-I and Unit-II stood at 10,870 MTPA in FY26, with an average capacity utilization of 95.29% (99.58% in FY25). Manufactured products cater to institutional and B2B industrial clients across agriculture, construction, textiles, chemicals, mining, and consumer goods. In FY26, trading activities generated 50.36% of revenue from operations while manufacturing activities contributed 49.64%. The company's sales are geographically concentrated in Eastern India, with West Bengal accounting for 85.27% of FY26 revenue. Key raw materials including PP granules, LLDPE, HDPE, and masterbatches are sourced from domestic and international suppliers.
Strategic manufacturing locations in West Bengal near agricultural and industrial hubs, multi-product portfolio with customisation capabilities, long-standing customer relationships, and quality certifications including ISO 9001:2015, ISO 22000:2018, and BIS licenses.
The Offer
Follow the Money — Use of Proceeds
- Repayment/pre-payment, in full or in part, of certain outstanding borrowings availed by our Company — ₹10.00 cr
- Funding the Capital expenditure towards setting up phase IV at our existing manufacturing facility, Unit-I, situated at NH2 Bypass Road, Jaugram, Abujhati, Jamalpur, West Bengal 713166 — ₹30.50 cr
- General Corporate Purposes
Valuation at the Offer Price
The filing does not print a single headline multiple, so this one is ours: the upper band divided by the latest restated earnings per share — the same arithmetic the “Basis for the Offer Price” section performs. It is struck on pre-issue earnings; where the issue creates new shares, the post-issue multiple is computed in the workings below. The peer group is the one the filing itself names. A premium is not the same thing as expensive and a discount is not the same thing as cheap — the peer table and the reasons sit further down this page.
FinMinutes IPO Score — How It's Built
Transparent, deterministic, computed from the filing — not an opinion. Open any component below to see exactly what it measures and what it is worth. Components with no disclosed input are dropped from the weighting entirely rather than held at an invented neutral, because a constant inside a weighted average is not neutral — it quietly drags every score toward the middle. Weighted across 5 live components.
88% of the designed weighting had real data behind it on this issue. Not yet scored here: Filing Integrity. A lower coverage figure does not mean a worse company — it means we are standing behind less of the picture, and you should read the findings below rather than the headline number.
How this is measured12%
Whether fresh capital actually enters the business. A predominantly offer-for-sale issue is marked down ONLY when the financials are weak. A profitable, cash-rich company selling down is treated as neutral, not penalised, because it does not need the money.
How this is measured32%
Driven by the models battery run on the filing's own restated numbers: the Piotroski fundamental tests (scored out of those we could actually run), the Altman Z-double-prime solvency zone, and the direction of profit across the disclosed period. It is not a single yes/no on last year's profit.
How this is measured10%
The post-issue earnings multiple against the peer median disclosed in the filing. A discount to the median scores well and a premium scores badly. When the filing does not disclose comparable peer multiples, this component is dropped from the weighting rather than held at a made-up neutral.
How this is measured6%
A proxy for syndicate strength, based today only on how many lead managers are on the issue: 75 where three or more banks are involved, 60 otherwise. We have not built a bank-by-bank track record, so treat this as a rough signal. When the filing does not disclose the syndicate, this component is dropped from the weighting rather than guessed.
How this is measured28%
Starts at 100 and loses points for every material finding: 12 for a flagged finding, 4 for a noted one. Two kinds feed it. DERIVED findings are computed from the filed numbers against stated thresholds — operating cash negative while profit is positive, related-party revenue above 15% of total, revenue rising while profit falls, goodwill above 30% of net worth, receivables growing more than 1.3x faster than sales, cash below half of short-term debt. Those are reproducible: the same filing gives the same answer every time, and the rule is printed beside the finding. READ findings come from the forensic sweep of the notes. Contingent liabilities, related-party intensity, customer concentration, litigation, auditor qualifications, statutory dues, promoter funding. Findings that record the ABSENCE of a problem — no litigation pending, an unmodified audit opinion — deduct nothing. This is the component our forensic read drives directly, and it moves most between companies.
3-Year Financial & Growth Trend
| Metric | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue (₹ Cr) | 375.5313 | 261.4773 | 109.0479 |
| Net Profit (₹ Cr) | 16.0128 | 8.1093 | 4.4436 |
| PAT Margin | 4.26% | 3.1% | 4.07% |
Market Context
NOT part of the FinMinutes ScoreThe Score above is what the filing says. Everything in this box is what the crowd says. We keep them apart on purpose — every other site blends the two and calls the result a rating. Demand is real information, but it is information about the market, not about the company, and it changes by the hour while the company does not.
Demand and our read of the filing are broadly in the same territory.
Subscription is low early in a book and high at the end, because most bids arrive in the final hours. A number read on day one says more about the clock than the company — which is precisely why it is not in the Score. GMP is unofficial, unregulated, and easily moved. Neither is a recommendation.
Why the numbers moved, in management’s own words
Taken from the Management’s Discussion and Analysis section of the filing. A number tells you what happened; this is the company’s explanation of why, and whether it calls the cause temporary or structural.
| Metric | Move | Management's stated reason | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue from Operations (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 43.6% | Revenue grew due to strong performance across manufacturing and trading verticals, supported by higher selling prices and full-year contribution from Unit-II. | Structural |
| Cost of Materials Consumed (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 32.7% | Cost of materials consumed increased due to higher raw material purchases to support expanding manufacturing production activity and higher business volumes. | Structural |
| Purchase of Stock in Trade (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 56.7% | Purchases of stock in trade rose sharply due to expanding bulk trading volume in plastic granules and PVC resins backed by a strengthened procurement network. | Structural |
| Employee Benefits Expense (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 85.0% | Employee benefit expenses increased due to higher salaries and wages and an increase in director remuneration from Rs. 0.06 crore to Rs. 1.02 crore. | Unexplained |
| Finance Costs (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 30.0% | Finance costs expanded due to higher working capital loan utilization to support capacity expansion and operational inventory holding. | Structural |
| Profit After Tax (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 97.5% | Net profit expanded due to strong top-line revenue growth across manufacturing and trading, efficient cost management, and margin improvement. | Structural |
| Inventories (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 89.1% | Inventories increased due to strategic stockpiling of raw materials, finished goods, and trading goods to mitigate supply chain disruptions and support market demand. | Structural |
| Trade Receivables (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 79.5% | Trade receivables expanded in line with operational revenue growth and year-end customer billing schedules. | Structural |
| Operating Cash Flow (FY26 vs FY25) | ↓ 188.8% | Operating cash outflow widened significantly due to a Rs. 66.08 crore inventory build-up in traded goods and raw materials required for business expansion. | Structural |
| Total Borrowings (FY26 vs FY25) | ↑ 63.4% | Borrowings increased due to additional short-term bank borrowings to meet expanding working capital needs. | Structural |
| Revenue from Operations (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 139.8% | Revenue surged due to adding Unit-II manufacturing capacity on lease from group company Hind Polyfabs and expanding bulk trading in plastic granules and PVC resins. | Structural |
| Cost of Materials Consumed (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 112.7% | Cost of materials consumed grew due to higher raw material purchases needed to run expanded manufacturing capacity at Unit-II. | Structural |
| Purchase of Stock in Trade (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 265.6% | Trading stock purchases rose sharply as the company expanded its distribution network and procurement base for plastic granules and PVC resins. | Structural |
| Employee Benefits Expense (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 47.0% | Employee benefit expenses increased due to operational expansion and additional staff hiring at manufacturing facilities. | Unexplained |
| Finance Costs (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 51.6% | Finance costs increased due to higher short-term working capital borrowings to fund business growth and higher interest on unsecured loans. | Structural |
| Depreciation and Amortisation Expense (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 19.5% | Depreciation increased due to plant and machinery additions that expanded the depreciable asset base. | Structural |
| Profit After Tax (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 82.5% | Net profit increased due to top-line expansion, higher EBITDA margins, and efficient cost management across operating heads. | Structural |
| Inventories (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 87.7% | Inventories increased due to higher raw material procurement for expanded production capacity and stocking traded goods in anticipation of demand. | Structural |
| Operating Cash Flow (FY25 vs FY24) | ↓ 30.5% | Operating cash outflow increased due to inventory build-up (Rs. 34.64 crore) to support a 23.61% expansion in installed manufacturing capacity. | Structural |
| Total Borrowings (FY25 vs FY24) | ↑ 21.3% | Borrowings increased due to short-term working capital debt taken to support business expansion, partially offset by Rs. 18.00 crore CCD conversion into equity. | Structural |
Headwinds
- Raw material price volatility in petrochemical derivatives tied to global crude oil prices sector
Crude oil price fluctuations and supply chain dynamics directly influence raw material costs (PP granules, HDPE, LLDPE, PVC), impacting margins if cost increases cannot be passed on immediately. - Geographic concentration of manufacturing facilities in West Bengal company
Operating both manufacturing facilities in West Bengal exposes business operations to regional economic, political, or weather-related disruptions. - High reliance on a limited number of suppliers for primary raw material procurement company
Procuring a significant share of raw materials from top suppliers creates supply chain risk if relationships or availability suffer disruption.
Tailwinds
- Government infrastructure spending and sector growth in agriculture, packaging, food grains, and construction macro
Steady industrial and agricultural activity drives sustained demand for industrial packaging products like PP woven sacks, FIBC bags, and packaging films. - Transition to higher-margin manufacturing model via Phase III and Phase IV capacity expansion company
Expanding manufacturing capacity to 18,070 MTPA will improve economies of scale, reduce unit production costs, and increase the revenue share from manufacturing.
| Facility | Period | Utilisation |
|---|---|---|
| Unit-I (Abujhati, Jamalpur, West Bengal) | FY26 | 95.2% |
| Unit-I (Abujhati, Jamalpur, West Bengal) | FY25 | 99.9% |
| Unit-I (Abujhati, Jamalpur, West Bengal) | FY24 | 79.5% |
| Unit-II (Panchpara, Howrah, West Bengal) | FY26 | 95.6% |
| Unit-II (Panchpara, Howrah, West Bengal) | FY25 | 98.4% |
| Combined Capacity (Unit-I & Unit-II) | FY26 | 95.3% |
| Combined Capacity (Unit-I & Unit-II) | FY25 | 99.6% |
| Combined Capacity (Unit-I & Unit-II) | FY24 | 79.5% |
Movements the filing does not explain
- Director Remuneration Surge in FY26 FY26 vs FY25 — Director remuneration increased 17-fold from Rs. 0.06 crore in FY25 to Rs. 1.02 crore in FY26, but MD&A text does not provide a specific narrative explanation for this compensation increase.
- GST Penalty Expense in FY25 FY25 vs FY24 — Other Expenses in FY25 included a Rs. 0.61 crore GST penalty paid for a stock mismatch between accounting records and physical inventory, but the MD&A narrative does not detail the operational cause of the stock variance.
A material movement that management does not address is not a finding on its own. It is a question the filing leaves open, and it is recorded here as one.
Issue Timeline
Dates as carried by the exchange feed. Allotment, refund and credit dates move more often than the open and close dates do.
- Refunds initiated2026-09-18
- Pre Application Start2026-09-10
- Bidding Start2026-09-11
- Bidding End2026-09-16
- Allotment Process Start2026-09-17
- Allotment Finalization2026-09-18
- Listing Day2026-09-21
- Mandate End2026-10-28
Applying, and Who Handles the Allotment
Check allotment status on the registrar’s own portal → We link the registrar directly rather than mirroring the form.
Deep Financials
Revenue, EBITDA and profit are what every listing site prints. Below are the full restated statements as disclosed, the ratios we compute from them, and a DuPont decomposition of the return on equity. A prospectus carries three years, not ten — that is the document’s ceiling, and within it we go as deep as it allows.
Income StatementThe profit and loss as filed, then what we derive from it — kept apart.
Statutory order, exactly as restated in the filing. Finance cost and depreciation sit inside Total Expenses under Ind AS, which is why they are listed among the expense lines here rather than below the total. The expense rows sum to the total. Rows the filing does not disclose separately are omitted rather than left blank.
| Income Statement — as filed (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue from Operations | 375.53 | 261.48 | 109.05 |
| Other Income | 0.30 | 0.38 | 0.75 |
| Total Income | 375.83 | 261.85 | 109.80 |
| Cost of Materials Consumed | 146.33 | 110.31 | 51.88 |
| Purchases of Stock-in-Trade | 211.04 | 134.68 | 36.84 |
| Changes in Inventories | -47.10 | -30.13 | -6.25 |
| Employee Benefit Expense | 4.02 | 2.17 | 1.48 |
| Finance Cost | 12.28 | 9.45 | 6.23 |
| Depreciation & Amortisation | 2.62 | 2.30 | 1.92 |
| Other Expenses | 23.20 | 21.88 | 12.75 |
| Total Expenses | 352.39 | 250.66 | 104.86 |
| Profit Before Exceptional Items and Tax | 23.45 | 11.20 | 4.94 |
| Profit Before Tax | 23.45 | 11.20 | 4.94 |
| Tax Expense | 7.44 | 3.09 | 0.50 |
| Profit After Tax | 16.01 | 8.11 | 4.44 |
| EPS - Basic | 10.55 | 6.06 | 3.47 |
| EPS - Diluted | 10.55 | 5.35 | 3.06 |
Balance SheetWhat the company owns, owes, and is worth on paper.
| Balance Sheet (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Share Capital | 15.18 | 15.18 | 13.38 |
| Reserves & Surplus | 48.16 | 32.15 | 7.84 |
| Net Worth | 63.34 | 47.33 | 21.22 |
| Long-term Borrowings | 8.24 | 14.23 | 31.05 |
| Short-term Borrowings | 156.95 | 86.88 | 52.30 |
| Total Borrowings | 165.19 | 101.11 | 83.35 |
| Trade Payables | 28.73 | 15.58 | 12.71 |
| Current Liabilities | 195.84 | 106.15 | 66.70 |
| Total Liabilities | 270.93 | 170.57 | 121.25 |
| Property, Plant & Equipment | 42.46 | 40.86 | 33.13 |
| Capital Work in Progress | 0.95 | 1.65 | 2.15 |
| Intangible Assets | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Investments | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Inventories | 140.22 | 74.14 | 39.50 |
| Trade Receivables | 64.26 | 35.80 | 31.43 |
| Cash & Equivalents | 6.56 | 6.83 | 3.39 |
| Current Assets | 227.16 | 127.70 | 85.88 |
| Total Assets | 270.93 | 170.57 | 121.25 |
Cash FlowWhere the cash actually went. Often the most honest statement of the three.
| Cash Flow (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net Cash from Operating Activities | -48.80 | -16.90 | -12.95 |
| Capital Expenditure | -4.22 | -10.02 | -2.83 |
| Net Cash from Investing Activities | -3.07 | -9.44 | -2.92 |
| Net Cash from Financing Activities | 51.79 | 26.31 | 15.84 |
| Net Change in Cash | -0.08 | -0.02 | -0.03 |
Ratio AnalysisProfitability, leverage, liquidity, efficiency and earnings quality — computed by us.
Every ratio below is computed by us from the line items the company disclosed — not copied from anywhere. The arithmetic is standard; the point is that somebody actually did it. Blank cells mean the filing did not disclose the inputs, and we would rather show a gap than invent a number.
| Ratio | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Profitability | |||
| EBITDA Margin (%) | 10.2 | 8.8 | 11.9 |
| EBIT Margin (%) | 9.5 | 7.9 | 10.2 |
| PAT Margin (%) | 4.3 | 3.1 | 4.1 |
| Return on Equity (%) | 25.3 | 17.1 | 20.9 |
| Return on Capital Employed (%) | 15.6 | 13.9 | 10.7 |
| Return on Assets (%) | 5.9 | 4.8 | 3.7 |
| Leverage | |||
| Debt / Equity (x) | 2.61 | 2.14 | 3.93 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA (x) | 4.14 | 4.11 | 6.11 |
| Interest Coverage (x) | 2.91 | 2.19 | 1.79 |
| Liquidity | |||
| Current Ratio (x) | 1.16 | 1.2 | 1.29 |
| Quick Ratio (x) | 0.44 | 0.5 | 0.7 |
| Efficiency | |||
| Asset Turnover (x) | 1.39 | 1.53 | 0.9 |
| Receivable Days | 62 | 50 | 105 |
| Inventory Days | 136 | 103 | 132 |
| Payable Days | 28 | 22 | 43 |
| Cash Conversion Cycle (days) | 170 | 131 | 194 |
| Quality of Earnings | |||
| Operating Cash Flow / PAT (x) | -3.05 | -2.08 | -2.91 |
| Accruals Ratio (%) | 23.9 | 14.7 | 14.3 |
| Capex / Depreciation (x) | 1.61 | 4.36 | 1.47 |
DuPont DecompositionWhy the return on equity is what it is: margin, efficiency, or leverage.
A headline return on equity tells you what. The DuPont decomposition tells you why — whether the return is earned through margin, through asset efficiency, or simply through leverage. Two companies can post an identical ROE for opposite reasons, and only one of them is safe.
| Component | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net Margin (PAT / Revenue) | 4.3% | 3.1% | 4.1% |
| Asset Turnover (Revenue / Assets) | 1.39x | 1.53x | 0.9x |
| Equity Multiplier (Assets / Net Worth) | 4.28x | 3.6x | 5.71x |
| = Return on Equity | 25.3% | 17.1% | 20.9% |
| Tax Burden (PAT / PBT) | 0.68x | 0.72x | 0.9x |
| Interest Burden (PBT / EBIT) | 0.66x | 0.54x | 0.44x |
| Operating Margin (EBIT / Revenue) | 9.5% | 7.9% | 10.2% |
Computed from the disclosed statements. Where the filing omits an input, the row is left blank rather than estimated.
Quality of EarningsWhat the statements say when you read them against each other.
What the statements say once you read them against each other. These are observations, not verdicts — every one is arithmetic on the numbers the company itself disclosed, and each is stated so you can go and check it in the filing.
- In FY26 the company reported a profit of 16.01 cr while operating cash flow was NEGATIVE at -48.80 cr. Reported earnings did not convert into cash. This is the single divergence most worth understanding in any set of accounts, and the filing is the place to look for why.
- Receivable days fell from 105 to 62. Collections improved over the disclosed period.
- Debt to equity stood at 2.61x in FY26.
Forensic ModelsBeneish, Altman and Piotroski — plus our own final-year check.
Beneish M-Score
7 of 8 inputsAn eight-variable model built to detect earnings manipulation, and built to run on exactly two consecutive years — which is what a prospectus gives us. It belongs here more than anywhere: a company about to list has the maximum possible incentive to have dressed up the very years it is about to show you. A score above −1.78 is the threshold at which the model says the accounts merit a closer look. It is a screening signal, not an accusation, and it was calibrated on listed companies elsewhere. Read the eight components, not just the total.
| Component | Value | What it captures |
|---|---|---|
| DSRI Days Sales in Receivables Index (Receivables_t / Sales_t) / (Receivables_t-1 / Sales_t-1) | 1.25 | Above 1 means receivables grew faster than sales. Revenue may be being recognised ahead of collection. |
| GMI Gross Margin Index GrossMargin_t-1 / GrossMargin_t | 0.947 | Above 1 means margins deteriorated. A firm with worsening prospects has more incentive to manipulate. |
| AQI Asset Quality Index AQ_t / AQ_t-1, where AQ = 1 - (CurrentAssets + PPE) / TotalAssets | — | Above 1 means a rising share of assets is soft (neither current nor fixed) — capitalised costs can hide here. |
| SGI Sales Growth Index Sales_t / Sales_t-1 | 1.436 | Growth is not manipulation. But high-growth firms face more pressure to keep the streak going. |
| DEPI Depreciation Index DepRate_t-1 / DepRate_t, where DepRate = Dep / (Dep + PPE) | 0.919 | Above 1 means assets are being depreciated more slowly — a quiet way to lift reported profit. |
| SGAI SG&A Index (SGA_t / Sales_t) / (SGA_t-1 / Sales_t-1), SGA proxied as employee cost + other expenses | 0.788 | A proxy, because filings rarely break out SG&A cleanly. Read it as a direction, not a precise figure. |
| LVGI Leverage Index Leverage_t / Leverage_t-1, where Leverage = (CurrentLiab + LongTermDebt) / TotalAssets | 1.067 | Above 1 means leverage rose. Debt covenants create pressure to hit numbers. |
| TATA Total Accruals to Total Assets (PAT - CashFromOperations) / TotalAssets | 0.2392 | The gap between reported profit and cash generated. The single heaviest term in the model — and the one that catches profit that never became cash. |
The filing does not disclose every input the model needs, so we withhold the composite score rather than substitute a guess. The components we could compute are above.
Altman Z″-Score (emerging markets)
Z″ = 5.72 · SafeA distress-prediction model. We use the Z″ variant deliberately: the original Z was calibrated on American manufacturers and misleads badly on Indian services companies. Above 2.6 is the safe zone, 1.1 to 2.6 is grey, below 1.1 is the distress zone. Like every model of its kind it is a screen, not a prophecy.
| X1 — Working Capital / Total Assets | 0.116 |
| X2 — Retained Earnings / Total Assets | 0.178 |
| X3 — EBIT / Total Assets | 0.132 |
| X4 — Net Worth / Total Liabilities | 0.234 |
| Z″ = 3.25 + 6.56·X1 + 3.26·X2 + 6.72·X3 + 1.05·X4 | 5.72 |
Piotroski F-Score (adapted)
4 / 8Nine yes-or-no tests of fundamental strength — except we run eight. One of the original nine asks whether the company issued new shares, which is plainly absurd to ask of a company whose entire purpose at this moment is to issue shares. We drop that test, and we would rather tell you that than quietly fudge it.
- ✓Positive return on assets
- ✗Positive operating cash flow
- ✓Return on assets improving
- ✗Cash flow exceeds profit (quality of earnings)
- ✓Long-term leverage decreasing
- ✗Current ratio improving
- ✓Gross margin improving
- ✗Asset turnover improving
The Final-Year Check
oursNot from any textbook. The hockey stick in the last year before a filing is the oldest pattern in this business, and nobody publishes it. So we measure it: how the final disclosed year compares with the years behind it. Real acceleration looks exactly the same on the page as a flattering one — which is precisely why it is worth naming rather than assuming either way.
- Cash conversion fell sharply in the final year: operating cash flow was -3.05x profit in FY26, against -2.08x in FY25. Profit rose; the cash behind it did not follow at the same rate.
Ratios Nobody Prints
- Contingent liabilities / Net worth: 2.4%
Contingent liabilities of 1.54 cr against a net worth of 63.34 cr — 2.4% of what the company is worth on paper. These are obligations that sit off the balance sheet but could land on it. What they consist of matters as much as the size: a corporate guarantee to a subsidiary is a different animal from a disputed tax demand, and the filing says which. - Related-party revenue / Total revenue: 3.7%
3.7% of revenue in FY26 came from entities connected to the promoters. Revenue you sell to yourself is not the same as revenue you won in the market. - Cash / Short-term borrowings: 0.04x
Short-term borrowings of 156.95 cr against cash of 6.56 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is only comfortable while lenders stay comfortable. - Promoter remuneration / PAT: 6.4%
Managerial remuneration to the promoter group was 1.02 cr against a profit of 16.01 cr. This is a legitimate cost — but it is also a route by which value leaves a company before it ever reaches a minority shareholder.
The Formula NotebookEvery number above, with the working shown. Check us.
Every number we publish, with the working shown. The formula, the same formula with this company’s actual figures put into it, the answer, and what it is for. Check us. That is the point.
PAT ÷ Net Worth16.01 ÷ 63.34What the company earned on the money shareholders have in it. The headline measure of return — and the one the DuPont section takes apart.
EBIT ÷ (Net Worth + Total Borrowings)35.73 ÷ (63.34 + 165.19) = 35.73 ÷ 228.53Return on ALL the capital in the business, borrowed as well as owned. Unlike ROE, it cannot be flattered by taking on debt.
EBITDA ÷ Revenue38.35 ÷ 375.53Operating profitability before the effects of debt, tax and depreciation. What the business earns from the act of trading.
Total Borrowings ÷ Net Worth165.19 ÷ 63.34How much the company has borrowed against what it owns. High is not automatically bad — ask whether the borrowing is being serviced comfortably.
EBIT ÷ Finance Cost35.73 ÷ 12.28How many times over operating profit covers the interest bill. Below about 2x, a meaningful share of what the business earns is going to lenders rather than owners.
(Trade Receivables ÷ Revenue) × 365(64.26 ÷ 375.53) × 365How long the company waits to be paid. Rising receivable days mean revenue is being booked faster than it is collected — which is where a great many accounting problems begin.
Inventory Days + Receivable Days − Payable Days136 + 62 − 28How long cash is tied up in the operating cycle before it comes back. The longer it is, the more working capital the business must fund.
Cash from Operations ÷ PAT-48.80 ÷ 16.01Did the profit turn into cash? Profit is an opinion; cash is a fact. When this sits well below 1x for long, the two are drifting apart, and the filing is where you find out why.
(PAT − Cash from Operations) ÷ Total Assets(16.01 − -48.80) ÷ 270.93 = 64.81 ÷ 270.93The share of reported profit that exists on paper rather than in the bank. It is also the heaviest single term in the Beneish model, for good reason.
Institutional Alpha: DRHP Deep Dive
Dressed Bride Pattern: Deepening Negative CFO of -Rs. 48.80 Crore Despite Profit Doubling
In FY26, Injecto Polymers reported a 97.46% surge in restated PAT to Rs. 16.0128 crore, but operating cash flows collapsed to -Rs. 48.8010 crore (from -Rs. 16.8959 crore in FY25). Working capital was heavily tied up in Rs. 140.2170 crore of inventory and Rs. 64.2648 crore of receivables, funded by Rs. 156.9518 crore in short-term bank debt.
Source: p.36, 48, 58, 61DGGI Fake Invoicing Notice of Rs. 21.27 Crore Against Promoter and Unit-II Lessor Entity
DGGI Kolkata issued a Show Cause Notice (DRC-01) on Jan 12, 2026 to group company Hind Polyfabs Private Limited and primary promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria for alleged fake invoicing of Rs. 21.2735 crore without physical supply of goods. Hind Polyfabs owns the premises for manufacturing Unit-II.
Source: p.25, 26, 277GST Stock Mismatch Penalty and Pending Section 454 Secretarial Adjudication
The company paid a Rs. 0.6100 crore GST penalty in FY25 due to a discrepancy between physical stock and accounting records. In addition, the company has filed a suo motu application under Section 454 before ROC Kolkata-I for historical secretarial non-compliances and incomplete Schedule III RPT disclosures.
Source: p.26, 27, 29, 30Shareholding, Syndicate & Leadership
Leadership & Skin in the Game
Leadership: Ramesh Kumar Rateria
Litigation: Show Cause Notice DRC-01 dated Jan 12, 2026 issued by DGGI Kolkata to group company Hind Polyfab and promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria involving Rs. 21.2735 crore (Rs. 2,127.35 lakhs) for alleged fake invoices without actual supply of goods. Material civil litigation filed by Company under Section 9 of Arbitration Act involving Rs. 2.6144 crore (Rs. 261.44 lakhs). Tax proceedings against Company in 5 cases involving Rs. 0.0145 crore (Rs. 1.45 lakhs). Group companies facing 57 tax proceedings involving Rs. 43.0705 crore.
Peers & Valuation
| Company | P/E | P/B | RoE | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emmbi Industries Limited | 19.43 | — | 4.06 | 1.73 |
| RDB Rasayans Limited | 9.04 | — | 13.74 | 28.84 |
At the ₹100 upper band, the issue is priced at 9.5x earnings — a 33% discount to the peer median of 14.2x. This is the arithmetic of the price band against the peers the filing itself lists; it is not a view on whether the offer is worth taking.
🔍 Forensic Findings — What the Footnotes Say
Findings from across the filing — the notes, MD&A, related-party disclosures, contingent liabilities, CARO and litigation, alongside the risk section itself. Each carries where it was found, so you can see which were buried and which were disclosed. Findings marked derived are computed from the filed numbers against a stated rule, shown beside them.
In FY26, restated PAT surged 97.46% to Rs. 16.0128 crore (from Rs. 8.1093 crore in FY25 and Rs. 4.4436 crore in FY24). However, Cash Flow from Operations (CFO) was negative in all three years, deteriorating to -Rs. 48.8010 crore in FY26 (-Rs. 16.8959 crore in FY25, -Rs. 12.9523 crore in FY24). This cash drain was driven by inventory ballooning 89.13% to Rs. 140.2170 crore (126 holding days) and receivables reaching Rs. 64.2648 crore, funded by short-term bank borrowings of Rs. 156.9518 crore.
p.36, 48, 58, 61DGGI Kolkata issued Show Cause Notice DRC-01 dated Jan 12, 2026 to group company Hind Polyfabs Private Limited (from which Unit-II is leased) and promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria involving Rs. 21.2735 crore for alleged issuance of fake invoices without actual supply of goods. Additionally, group companies face 57 tax proceedings totaling Rs. 43.0705 crore.
p.25, 26, 277The company incurred and paid a penalty of Rs. 0.6100 crore in FY25 for GST stock mismatches between accounting books and physical inventory. Furthermore, the company filed a suo motu application under Section 454 before ROC Kolkata-I for incomplete RPT disclosures and non-compliances under Schedule III/AOC-4 for FY23, FY24, and FY25.
p.26, 27, 29, 30Unit-II operating facility is leased from group company Hind Polyfabs (Rs. 0.60 crore rent). Purchases of raw materials and traded goods from promoter group entities Maruti Packagers (Rs. 13.18 crore) and Hind Polyfabs (Rs. 2.26 crore) totaled Rs. 15.44 crore in FY26. Unsecured loans from promoter group entities total Rs. 18.70 crore (11.32% of total debt), all repayable on demand. Promoters also provided personal guarantees covering 100% of company debt (Rs. 165.19 crore).
p. 42, 62, 63, 65 and 2 moreIn FY26, Injecto Polymers generated Rs. 375.5313 crore in revenue from operations and Rs. 16.0128 crore in net profit with a net worth of Rs. 63.3414 crore. Despite exceeding mainboard financial scale thresholds, the issuer opted for the BSE SME platform with lighter post-listing disclosure requirements.
p.1, 6, 58The company benchmarks its valuation against mainboard-listed peers Emmbi Industries Limited (P/E 19.43x) and RDB Rasayans Limited (P/E 9.04x), deriving a peer median P/E of 14.24x.
p.125, 128Show Cause Notice DRC-01 dated Jan 12, 2026 issued by DGGI Kolkata to group company Hind Polyfab and promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria involving Rs. 21.2735 crore (Rs. 2,127.35 lakhs) for alleged fake invoices without actual supply of goods. Material civil litigation filed by Company under Section 9 of Arbitration Act involving Rs. 2.6144 crore (Rs. 261.44 lakhs). Tax proceedings against Company in 5 cases involving Rs. 0.0145 crore (Rs. 1.45 lakhs). Group companies facing 57 tax proceedings involving Rs. 43.0705 crore.
p. 2, 25, 26, 62 and 2 moreOperating cash flow was negative ₹48.80 cr in FY26 while the company reported a profit after tax of ₹16.01 cr. Profit that does not arrive as cash has to be funded from somewhere else.
rule: CFO<0 & PAT>0Short-term borrowings of ₹156.95 cr against cash of ₹6.56 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is comfortable only while lenders stay comfortable.
rule: cash < 0.5x short-term debtCompany's Claims vs Reality
We stress-test each claim against the filing's own data.
Unit-I and Unit-II operated at 95.29% capacity utilization in FY26 (99.58% in FY25) on 10,870 MTPA capacity, demonstrating high plant utilization that justifies Phase IV addition of 7,200 MTPA. However, 50.36% of revenue remains low-margin trading.
p.22, 101, 106, 127Total borrowings reached Rs. 165.1869 crore in FY26 (including Rs. 156.9518 crore short-term bank debt) with finance costs of Rs. 12.2829 crore. Repaying Rs. 10.00 crore provides minor deleveraging (<6.1% of total debt).
p.58, 101, 266Operating cash flows were negative across all three years (-Rs. 48.80 crore in FY26) while inventory jumped to Rs. 140.22 crore and short-term debt reached Rs. 156.95 crore, contradicting the claim of self-sustaining operating cash flows.
p.36, 48, 58, 119Live Subscription Status
Allotment Status
Check your allotment on the registrar's portal → Registrar: Integrated Registry
Allotment is decided by the registrar, not by us and not by the exchange. In an oversubscribed retail book, allotment is by lottery, so a large application does not improve your odds beyond one lot. If money stays blocked after the refund date, the mandate expiry (28 Oct 2026) is the date to raise with your bank.
Analyst Q&A: Burning Questions
Facts from the filing. No recommendation — that layer arrives once our Research Analyst registration is live.
How are the fresh issue IPO proceeds allocated across capex, debt repayment, and general corporate purposes?
Fresh issue proceeds are allocated as: Rs. 30.5000 crore for funding Phase IV capital expenditure at Unit-I (Abujhati, West Bengal), Rs. 10.0000 crore for repayment/prepayment of outstanding borrowings, and the balance for General Corporate Purposes (GCP capped at 25%).
p.101What is the promoters' shareholding pre and post-issue, and what is their acquisition history?
Promoters Ramesh Kumar Rateria, Ashok Kumar Rateria, and 5 corporate entities hold 73.97% pre-issue shareholding, diluting to 54.00% post-issue. Financial investors were allotted 1,800,000 shares at Rs. 100.00 per share in March 2025, while promoter group 3-year WACA stands at Rs. 33.33 per share following a 1:10 stock split in December 2023.
p.82, 84, 87, 130What are the key related-party transactions, leased assets, and promoter debt dependencies?
Unit-II manufacturing facility is leased from group entity Hind Polyfabs (Rs. 0.60 crore rent). Purchases of goods/services from group entities Maruti Packagers (Rs. 13.18 crore) and Hind Polyfabs (Rs. 2.26 crore) totaled Rs. 15.44 crore in FY26. Unsecured loans from promoter group entities total Rs. 18.70 crore (all repayable on demand), and promoters provided personal guarantees covering 100% of debt (Rs. 165.19 crore).
p.42, 62, 63, 65, 248, 256How did operating cash flow perform relative to restated net profits over FY24 to FY26?
Restated PAT increased from Rs. 4.4436 crore in FY24 to Rs. 8.1093 crore in FY25 and Rs. 16.0128 crore in FY26. However, Cash Flow from Operations (CFO) was negative in all three years (-Rs. 12.9523 crore in FY24, -Rs. 16.8959 crore in FY25, and -Rs. 48.8010 crore in FY26) due to working capital lockup in inventory (Rs. 140.22 crore).
p.36, 48, 58, 61What secretarial, statutory compliance, litigation, and tax findings exist for the issuer?
DGGI Kolkata issued a Rs. 21.2735 crore Show Cause Notice against group entity Hind Polyfabs and promoter Ramesh Kumar Rateria for alleged fake invoices. A GST stock mismatch penalty of Rs. 0.6100 crore was paid in FY25. A Section 454 suo motu application for historical Schedule III/AOC-4 secretarial non-compliances is pending before ROC Kolkata-I. Statutory auditor M/s Banerjee Sarkar & Co. changed within the last 3 years.
p.25, 26, 27, 29, 62, 277What are the application lot terms, retail ticket requirements, market maker details, and liquidity constraints for public investors?
The offer is listed on BSE SME with a minimum retail application requirement of 2 lots (2,400 shares). Trading occurs strictly in standardized market lots of 1,200 shares, and because lots are indivisible, partial exit or fractional lot trading is impossible. CapitalSquare Financial Services Private Limited is the Market Maker with 283,200 reserved shares (5.05%) and a mandatory 3-year obligation period. Standard SME 5% price circuit limits apply.
p.1, 5, 7, 55, 79What Earlier Investors Paid
Early capital takes real risk and is fairly rewarded for it — a large multiple built over many years is normal. What deserves a closer look is a steep step-up in a short window: a round priced cheaply only months before the offer.
| Shareholder | Priced at | When | vs IPO price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biplab Chakraborty and Sudip Maity | ₹100.00 | 1998-09-04 | 1.0x |
| Mahajan Vyapar Private Limited | ₹100.00 | 2002-12-10 | 1.0x |
| Bhagyashri Trading, Nihon Impex, Nivedeeka Commercial, Shipra Retailer, Shivarpan Vanijya, Vinayak Tie-Up | ₹100.00 | 2009-03-31 | 1.0x |
| Hind Polyfabs Private Limited | ₹100.00 | 2020-02-04 | 1.0x |
| Hind Polyfabs Private Limited | ₹100.00 | 2020-02-06 | 1.0x |
| Existing Shareholders | — | 2023-12-26 | — |
| Crystals Share Broking, Kaypee Infocom, Novel Apartments, Palak Tradelink, Prerna Agency, Shiv Towers, Ultimate Agency, Uphar Vintrade | ₹100.00 | 2025-03-24 | 1.0x |
| Allotted below the band — 5 entries | |||
| Ramesh Kumar Rateria (HUF), Bhagyashri Trading, Nivedeeka Commercial, Vinayak Tie-Up, Suman Towers, Suman Financial Advisory | ₹107.00 | 2018-08-10 | as disclosed |
| Ramesh Kumar Rateria, Ashok Kumar Rateria, Nivedeeka, Vinayak, Suman Towers, Suman Financial, Rupam Rateria, Rajat Rateria, Snehal Rateria, Prem Rateria, Ramesh Kumar Rateria (HUF) | ₹107.00 | 2018-12-08 | as disclosed |
| Suman Towers Private Limited | ₹132.55 | 2022-11-08 | as disclosed |
| Suman Financial Advisory Private Limited | ₹132.55 | 2022-11-09 | as disclosed |
| Bhagyashri Trading, Nilkanth Commercial, Nivedeeka Commercial, Shipra Retailers, Vinayak Tie-Up | ₹135.00 | 2023-08-09 | as disclosed |
The 5 allotments listed under “allotted below the band” are shown at their as-disclosed per-share price. They are not adjusted for any later bonus issue or share split, so where a company has issued bonus shares the raw multiple understates the true return and can even read as a loss when none was made. We show them as filed and decline to compute a misleading multiple.
Prices are as stated in the filing’s allotment history and are not adjusted for later bonus issues or share splits. Where a company has issued bonus shares, the multiples above understate the true return and can even read as losses. Adjusting for that is on our list; until it is done we would rather show the raw disclosure and tell you its limits than publish a confident number that is wrong.
Lock-in Expiry Calendar
Shares held before the IPO cannot be sold immediately; they unlock in tranches. When a tranche unlocks, more shares become eligible to trade. Retail investors are frequently caught unaware by these dates. The schedule below follows from the listing date; quantities are shown only where the filing discloses them.
- 21 Sep 2029promoter3 years4,157,920 shares (20% of total)
- 21 Sep 2027promoter1 year3,534,030 shares (17% of total)
- 21 Sep 2028promoter2 years3,534,030 shares (17% of total)
- 21 Sep 2027public1 year3,951,020 shares (19% of total)
An unlock means more shares may be sold — not that they will be, and not that the price will move. We state the dates; what you do with them is your call.
Educational, grounded entirely in the company's filings (DRHP/RHP). Not investment advice. FinMinutes does not provide buy/sell recommendations.