Technocraft Ventures
FinMinutes Deep Business Model & Edge
Technocraft Ventures Limited is an Indian Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) company specializing in public infrastructure development with a primary focus on water and wastewater treatment systems. The company generates revenue by executing turnkey engineering projects and providing long-term operation and maintenance (O&M) services to government authorities.
What this company actually does — full breakdown ▾
Incorporated in 1998, Technocraft Ventures Limited is a multidisciplinary infrastructure player executing turnkey EPC projects across Northern and Central India, primarily concentrated in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. Its core service offerings span water supply schemes, sewage networks, high-capacity Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) of up to 56 MLD utilizing SBR and UASB technologies, roads and highways, electrical transmission, and urban planning. The company operates through an in-house engineering team of 78 professionals, bypassing third-party subcontractors for core design-build phases to maintain execution control. Technocraft’s primary customer base comprises central and state government agencies, representing 99.98% of its FY26 operating revenue under major national schemes like AMRUT 2.0, Jal Jeevan Mission, and Namami Gange. Key inputs such as DI pipes and electrical equipment are sourced from established domestic suppliers, with the top 10 suppliers accounting for 47.26% of operations costs. Distinctively, the company transitioned to larger-scale projects via the strategic acquisition of partnership firm M/s Ultratech Engineers, helping build an outstanding order book of ₹12,358.97 million as of FY26.
- Water & Wastewater Infrastructure work — Turnkey EPC execution of water supply projects, sewerage networks, sewage treatment plants, transmission mains, and trenchless tunneling.
- Roads and Highways work — Engineering, construction, and maintenance of roads and highway projects.
- Operation & Maintenance (O&M) work — Long-term operation and maintenance of commissioned public utility assets such as STPs, water networks, and roads.
Strong in-house design-build execution capabilities with proven technical experience in advanced SBR and UASB wastewater treatment systems, combined with pre-qualification credentials for high-capacity (up to 56 MLD) STPs and deep-rooted bidding relationships with state authorities under national flagship schemes.
The Offer
Follow the Money — Use of Proceeds
- Funding working capital requirements of our Company — ₹150.00 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: Anchor Quality. 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) | 344.996 | 279.564 | 226.102 |
| Net Profit (₹ Cr) | 43.315 | 28.204 | 19.054 |
| PAT Margin | 12.56% | 10.09% | 8.43% |
Revenue Breakdown
- Water & Wastewater Infrastructure work: 85.44%
- Roads and Highways work: 12.87%
- Operation & Maintenance work: 1.67%
- Other Operating Revenues / Sale of Material: 0.02%
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.
The market is bidding this issue enthusiastically. The headline financials look strong, but our forensic read of the filing is not clean — the risk band is high and the footnotes carry material flags. That gap is the fact worth noticing. Strong demand is information about the market; the flags are information about the company, and the two are not saying the same thing here. Read the Forensic Findings below before the momentum decides it for you.
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.
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 | 345.00 | 279.56 | 226.10 |
| Other Income | 2.00 | 1.44 | 1.20 |
| Total Income | 347.00 | 281.00 | 227.30 |
| Cost of Materials Consumed | 74.74 | 104.68 | 85.01 |
| Employee Benefit Expense | 11.84 | 10.04 | 6.03 |
| Finance Cost | 11.50 | 9.24 | 7.93 |
| Depreciation & Amortisation | 2.00 | 1.82 | 1.04 |
| Other Expenses | 5.37 | 4.81 | 2.53 |
| Total Expenses | 288.64 | 242.96 | 201.52 |
| Profit Before Tax | 58.67 | 38.57 | 26.06 |
| Tax Expense | 15.35 | 10.36 | 7.01 |
| Profit After Tax | 43.32 | 28.20 | 19.05 |
| EPS - Basic | 14.39 | 9.37 | 6.33 |
| EPS - Diluted | 14.39 | 9.37 | 6.33 |
Below this line the figures are ours, not the filing's. Ind AS has no EBITDA or EBIT line. We reconstruct them from disclosed items — EBIT as profit before tax plus finance cost, less any exceptional item and share of associate profit sitting below the operating line; EBITDA as EBIT plus depreciation. The working is in the Formula Notebook.
| Derived by us (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| EBITDA | 72.18 | 49.63 | 35.03 |
Balance SheetWhat the company owns, owes, and is worth on paper.
| Balance Sheet (₹ Cr) | FY26 | FY25 | FY24 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Share Capital | 30.10 | 7.53 | 7.53 |
| Reserves & Surplus | 133.27 | 112.46 | 84.25 |
| Net Worth | 163.38 | 119.98 | 91.78 |
| Long-term Borrowings | 29.82 | 26.84 | 27.25 |
| Short-term Borrowings | 59.95 | 60.59 | 52.86 |
| Total Borrowings | 89.76 | 87.43 | 80.11 |
| Trade Payables | 56.58 | 12.50 | 21.06 |
| Current Liabilities | 160.48 | 122.31 | 133.84 |
| Total Liabilities | 191.01 | 149.76 | 166.27 |
| Property, Plant & Equipment | 7.59 | 8.10 | 6.51 |
| Capital Work in Progress | 1.10 | 0.84 | — |
| Inventories | 68.33 | 88.93 | 55.75 |
| Trade Receivables | 117.98 | 58.18 | 100.18 |
| Cash & Equivalents | 13.10 | 0.51 | 1.12 |
| Current Assets | 279.44 | 215.77 | 217.76 |
| Total Assets | 354.38 | 269.74 | 258.05 |
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 | 28.70 | 21.68 | 1.40 |
| Capital Expenditure | 1.65 | 4.15 | 2.48 |
| Net Cash from Investing Activities | -7.59 | -12.64 | 0.26 |
| Net Cash from Financing Activities | -8.52 | -9.66 | -3.26 |
| Net Change in Cash | 12.59 | -0.61 | -1.59 |
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 (%) | 20.8 | 17.7 | 15.4 |
| EBIT Margin (%) | 20.2 | 17 | 15 |
| PAT Margin (%) | 12.6 | 10.1 | 8.4 |
| Return on Equity (%) | 26.5 | 23.5 | 20.8 |
| Return on Capital Employed (%) | 27.7 | 23 | 19.8 |
| Return on Assets (%) | 12.2 | 10.5 | 7.4 |
| Leverage | |||
| Debt / Equity (x) | 0.55 | 0.73 | 0.87 |
| Net Debt / EBITDA (x) | 1.06 | 1.75 | 2.26 |
| Interest Coverage (x) | 6.1 | 5.17 | 4.29 |
| Liquidity | |||
| Current Ratio (x) | 1.74 | 1.76 | 1.63 |
| Quick Ratio (x) | 1.32 | 1.04 | 1.21 |
| Efficiency | |||
| Asset Turnover (x) | 0.97 | 1.04 | 0.88 |
| Receivable Days | 125 | 76 | 162 |
| Inventory Days | 334 | 310 | 239 |
| Payable Days | 276 | 44 | 90 |
| Cash Conversion Cycle (days) | 183 | 342 | 311 |
| Quality of Earnings | |||
| Operating Cash Flow / PAT (x) | 0.66 | 0.77 | 0.07 |
| Accruals Ratio (%) | 4.1 | 2.4 | 6.8 |
| Capex / Depreciation (x) | 0.82 | 2.28 | 2.39 |
| Inventory and payable days are measured against cost of goods (materials consumed + purchases of stock-in-trade + change in inventories). Receivable days against revenue. | |||
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) | 12.6% | 10.1% | 8.4% |
| Asset Turnover (Revenue / Assets) | 0.97x | 1.04x | 0.88x |
| Equity Multiplier (Assets / Net Worth) | 2.17x | 2.25x | 2.81x |
| = Return on Equity | 26.5% | 23.5% | 20.8% |
| Tax Burden (PAT / PBT) | 0.74x | 0.73x | 0.73x |
| Interest Burden (PBT / EBIT) | 0.84x | 0.81x | 0.77x |
| Operating Margin (EBIT / Revenue) | 20.3% | 17.1% | 15% |
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.
- Receivable days fell from 162 to 125. Collections improved over the disclosed period.
- Between FY24 and FY26 revenue grew 53% while profit grew 127%. Profit expanding at several times the rate of revenue is not automatically a concern — operating leverage does exactly this — but it is worth confirming from the filing whether the gap comes from genuine margin expansion or from one-off items.
Forensic ModelsBeneish, Altman, Piotroski and the Montier C-score — plus our own final-year check.
Beneish M-Score
M = -1.54An 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) | 1.643 | 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 | 0.799 | 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 | 1.118 | 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 | 1.234 | 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) | 0.88 | 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 | 0.939 | 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 | 0.971 | Above 1 means leverage rose. Debt covenants create pressure to hit numbers. |
| TATA Total Accruals to Total Assets (PAT - CashFromOperations) / TotalAssets | 0.0413 | 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. |
This score is driven primarily by the sales-growth term (SGI). Growth is the one variable in this model that is not itself a manipulation signal — the model treats rapid growth as pressure to keep the streak going, not as evidence of anything. A company that grew revenue several-fold will read high here for that reason alone. The variable that speaks to manipulation directly is TATA (accruals — profit that did not become cash); read that one, and the receivables trend, rather than the headline M.
M = -1.54, above the −1.78 threshold. On this model the accounts merit closer reading. That is a prompt to go to the filing, not a conclusion about it.
Altman Z″-Score (emerging markets)
Z″ = 8.91 · 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 | 0.336 |
| X2 — Reserves / Total Assets | 0.376 |
| X3 — EBIT / Total Assets | 0.198 |
| X4 — Net Worth / Total Liabilities | 0.855 |
| Z″ = 3.25 + 6.56·X1 + 3.26·X2 + 6.72·X3 + 1.05·X4 | 8.91 |
X2 is meant to read retained earnings. The filing reports Other Equity, which also holds securities premium paid in by investors, so X2 here runs on reserves and reads higher than true retained earnings would. The more premium the company has raised before listing, the more Z″ is flattered.
Piotroski F-Score (adapted)
5 / 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
Montier C-Score
4 of 6 signsSix yes-or-no signs that reported profit may be running ahead of the business, from James Montier’s 2008 screen, read here for FY26 against FY25. Each is a direction in the statements, not a judgement. Several together are a reason to read the accounting policies and notes closely; none on its own means anything is wrong, and growing companies trip some of them honestly.
- ●Gap between profit and operating cash flow widening · PAT − CFO: ₹6.5 cr in FY25, ₹14.6 cr in FY26
- ●Receivable days rising · 76 days in FY25, 125 days in FY26
- ●Inventory days rising · 310 days in FY25, 334 days in FY26 (on cost of goods)
- ○Other current assets rising against revenue · 24.4% of revenue in FY25, 23.2% in FY26 (current assets less cash, receivables and inventory)
- ○Depreciation falling against fixed assets · 22.5% of net block in FY25, 26.4% in FY26
- ●Total assets growing more than 10% a year · 31.4% in FY26
Ratios Nobody Prints
- Contingent liabilities / Net worth: 109%
Contingent liabilities of 178.01 cr against a net worth of 163.38 cr — 109% 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: 4.8%
4.8% 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: 0.22x
Short-term borrowings of 59.95 cr against cash of 13.10 cr. Debt that must be refinanced within a year is only comfortable while lenders stay comfortable. - Promoter remuneration / PAT: 4.8%
Managerial remuneration to the promoter group was 2.10 cr against a profit of 43.32 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.
What the Price RequiresThe profit the offer price needs, at three hurdle rates. A restatement of the price, not a view on it.
At the upper band of ₹212.00, the market value is ₹638 cr. A buyer who wants a given return each year from a business that never grows needs annual profit of market value × that return. The three rates are round hurdle rates, not this company’s cost of capital, so pick the one that is yours. The years columns assume profit compounds from the FY26 figure and the price stands still. None of this is a forecast, a fair value or a target.
| Hurdle rate | Profit the price needs | × FY26 profit | Years at 15% growth | Years at 25% growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10% a year | ₹63.8 cr | 1.5x | 2.8 | 1.7 |
| 12% a year | ₹76.6 cr | 1.8x | 4.1 | 2.6 |
| 14% a year | ₹89.3 cr | 2.1x | 5.2 | 3.2 |
- Earnings yield at the upper band: 6.79% (FY26 profit ÷ market value).
- Free cash flow yield: 4.24% (operating cash flow less capital expenditure, ₹27.1 cr, ÷ market value).
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 Worth43.32 ÷ 163.38What 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)70.17 ÷ (163.38 + 89.76) = 70.17 ÷ 253.14Return on ALL the capital in the business, borrowed as well as owned. Unlike ROE, it cannot be flattered by taking on debt.
EBITDA ÷ Revenue72.18 ÷ 345.00Operating profitability before the effects of debt, tax and depreciation. What the business earns from the act of trading.
Total Borrowings ÷ Net Worth89.76 ÷ 163.38How much the company has borrowed against what it owns. High is not automatically bad — ask whether the borrowing is being serviced comfortably.
EBIT ÷ Finance Cost70.17 ÷ 11.50How 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(117.98 ÷ 345.00) × 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 Days334 + 125 − 276How 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 ÷ PAT28.70 ÷ 43.32Did 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(43.32 − 28.70) ÷ 354.38 = 14.62 ÷ 354.38The 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.
Price × Post-issue Shares₹212.00 × 30,100,764 sharesWhat the whole company is being valued at, if the issue prices at the top of the band.
Market Cap + Total Borrowings − Cash638.14 + 89.76 − 13.10What it would actually cost to buy the whole business: you take on its debt and you get its cash. This is the number a buyer cares about, and it is the reason a P/E on its own can mislead.
Enterprise Value ÷ EBITDA714.80 ÷ 72.18The multiple that includes debt. Two companies on the same P/E — one debt-free, one heavily borrowed — are not the same investment, and only this number tells you so.
Market Cap ÷ PAT638.14 ÷ 43.32The familiar multiple. Useful, but blind to debt — read it alongside EV/EBITDA, never instead of it.
EBIT × (1 − tax rate) ÷ (Net Worth + Debt − Cash)NOPAT ÷ Invested CapitalWhat the business earns on the capital actually at work in it. We do not compare this to a cost of capital: that would need a beta, an unlisted company has none, and inventing one would be theatre.
Latest full-year PAT ÷ market value₹43.32 cr ÷ ₹638.14 crThe P/E turned upside down: what each rupee of market value earns today. Set it against what you could earn elsewhere; the gap is what growth has to make up.
(Operating cash flow − capital expenditure) ÷ market value₹27.05 cr ÷ ₹638.14 crCash left after the company pays for its own investment, against the price of the whole company. Profit can be shaped by accounting choices; this is harder to shape.
P/E ÷ trailing PAT growth (%)14.73 ÷ 53.6%PEG was designed for FORWARD growth. This one uses TRAILING growth, because that is all a prospectus gives us — and the final year before an IPO is very often the best year the company will have for a while. A low PEG here may say more about the timing of the filing than about the price. We show it because it was asked for; we show the growth denominator beside it so it cannot mislead you quietly.
Workspace
The post-issue share count is stated as “[•]” in this filing until final pricing, so we derive it: profit after tax divided by earnings per share gives the pre-issue count, and the fresh issue divided by the offer price gives the new shares. Everything below rests on that derivation. It is close, not exact.
The numbers are already loaded. Move the offer price and watch every multiple move with it. Set your own growth and margin and see what they imply two years out. These are your assumptions, not our forecast — we have no view on what this company will earn, and the moment we published one we would be doing something we are not registered to do. What we can do is put the arithmetic in front of you and get out of the way.
Price defaults to the top of the band. Margin defaults to what the company actually reported in FY26.
Projections are arithmetic on the inputs you typed. They are not a forecast, not a recommendation, and not a view on whether this offer is worth taking. Educational only.
Institutional Alpha: DRHP Deep Dive
India’s infrastructure construction sector is witnessing a rapid expansion driven by national policies, with transport, power, and water supply/sanitation (WSS) representing roughly 80% of the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) outlays. Flagship government initiatives like AMRUT 2.0, with an ₹80,000 million allocation for water security, alongside the Jal Jeevan Mission and Namami Gange, are creating massive demand for high-capacity wastewater treatment and sewerage systems. The EPC model remains the dominant implementation method, accounting for 75% of NIP projects. To reduce regional bidding intensity and capture larger economies of scale, the industry is increasingly favoring multi-disciplinary contractors capable of executing complex, integrated design-build-operate packages.
Future Planning & Capital Allocation
The company has planned a capital deployment of ₹1,500.00 million from the fresh issue proceeds towards meeting incremental working capital requirements for FY27. This funding is aligned to execute its ₹12,358.97 million order book and support the bid-capacity requirements for new tenders like the Delhi Jal Board project.
Source: RHP p. 138, 237, 240Competitive Position
Technocraft enjoys a superior pre-tax Return on Equity (26.51% in FY26) and ROCE (27.72% in FY26) compared to its listed peers like VA Tech Wabag (14.37% RoE) and EMS Limited (8.62% RoE), while maintaining highly competitive bid-to-award conversion metrics.
Source: RHP p. 153, 280Execution / Track Record
Technocraft has scaled its turnkey execution footprint, completing 6 government projects in FY26 compared to 2 in FY24, and successfully executing STPs ranging up to 56 MLD in capacity.
Source: RHP p. 254, 277Shareholding, Syndicate & Leadership
Leadership & Skin in the Game
Leadership: Sanjay Tyagi (Managing Director)
Litigation: Against Company: 8 tax proceedings involving an aggregate amount of ₹99.79 million (₹7.81 million direct tax, ₹91.98 million indirect tax). Against Promoters: 3 criminal proceedings (including FIR No. 393/2023 regarding a worker fatality during excavation) and 1 direct tax proceeding involving ₹0.06 million.
Auditor / RPT Flags: Statutory auditors Rishi Kapoor & Company issued an unmodified examination report on the Restated Consolidated Financial Information. However, notes to accounts disclose an accounting adjustment for ₹0.14 million of incorrectly recorded interest on delayed payments to MSMEs in FY25. Significant related party transactions exist with Group Company VVIP Infratech Limited, comprising purchases and job work of ₹111.38 million in FY26 and ₹657.43 million in FY25.
Peers & Valuation
| Company | P/E | P/B | RoE | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VA Tech Wabag Limited | 31.96 | — | 15.67 | — |
| Denta Water and Infra Solutions Limited | 14.81 | — | — | — |
| Vishnu Prakash R Punglia Limited | — | — | 21.3 | — |
| Welspun Enterprises Ltd | — | — | 15.79 | — |
At the ₹212 upper band, the issue is priced at 14.7x earnings — a 37% discount to the peer median of 23.4x. 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.
The company's top 10 customers accounted for 95.68% of total operating revenue in FY26, 97.60% in FY25, and 99.55% in FY24. These clients are exclusively government and public sector undertakings, exposing the company to milestone-based payment delays, administrative certifications, and tight liquidity.
RHP p. 34, 46, 299FIR No. 393/2023 was registered under IPC Sections 283, 290, and 431 in Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh against Managing Director Sanjay Tyagi and certain Senior Management Personnel (Vinay Kumar Shukla and Fatehchand Sharma) regarding the death of a construction worker during sewer excavation works under the AMRUT Programme.
RHP p. 73, 536, 537The company is unable to trace certain historical corporate records and statutory ROC forms filed between 1998 and 2014. Additionally, numerous filings (AOC-4, CRA-2, CRA-4, MGT-7, CHG-4, ADT-1) have been submitted to the ROC with significant delays, requiring a composite corrective Form GNL-2 filing.
RHP p. 40, 41, 42, 619The company engages in material purchases and job work with its Group Company VVIP Infratech Limited. These transactions constituted ₹111.38 million (4.76% of cost of revenue) in FY26 and ₹657.43 million (26.64% of cost of revenue) in FY25.
RHP p. 47, 120, 297The company has unsecured borrowings from directors, relatives, and associate entities totaling ₹311.34 million as of March 31, 2026. These loans carry a 12% interest rate and do not have a specific repayment schedule, making them repayable on demand.
RHP p. 57, 405, 409, 410Against Company: 8 tax proceedings involving an aggregate amount of ₹99.79 million (₹7.81 million direct tax, ₹91.98 million indirect tax). Against Promoters: 3 criminal proceedings (including FIR No. 393/2023 regarding a worker fatality during excavation) and 1 direct tax proceeding involving ₹0.06 million.
RHP p. 1, 38, 96, 113, 120, 365, 391, 393, 394, 534, 536Statutory auditors Rishi Kapoor & Company issued an unmodified examination report on the Restated Consolidated Financial Information. However, notes to accounts disclose an accounting adjustment for ₹0.14 million of incorrectly recorded interest on delayed payments to MSMEs in FY25. Significant related party transactions exist with Group Company VVIP Infratech Limited, comprising purchases and job work of ₹111.38 million in FY26 and ₹657.43 million in FY25.
RHP p. 1, 38, 96, 113, 120, 365, 391, 393, 394, 534, 536Trade receivables grew 102.8% against revenue growth of 23.4% in FY26. Revenue may be being recognised ahead of collection.
rule: receivables growth > 1.3x sales growthShort-term borrowings of ₹59.95 cr against cash of ₹13.10 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.
Does restated consolidated data support the stated growth rates?
RHP p. 150, 269 (Revenue from operations grew from ₹2,261.02 million in FY24 to ₹3,449.96 million in FY26, representing a CAGR of 23.52%, while PAT grew from ₹190.54 million to ₹433.15 million)Do disclosures confirm in-house execution versus external subcontracting costs?
RHP p. 52, 297 (While core engineering is in-house, the company notes high reliance on contract labour deployed via third-party subcontractors for civil and electrical site activities, which represented ₹1,105.90 million in FY26 purchases)Proprietary SWOT — Company-Specific
Strengths
- Robust unexecuted order book of ₹12,358.97 million as of March 31, 2026, providing high mid-term revenue visibility.
- Pre-qualification credentials in executing complex high-capacity wastewater treatment plants (STPs up to 56 MLD) using SBR technology.
Weaknesses
- Extreme geographical concentration, with Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan accounting for 88.58% of FY26 revenue.
- High customer concentration, with top 10 customers generating 95.68% of operating revenue.
Opportunities
- Government capital expenditure outlays on urban water infrastructure under centrally sponsored programs such as AMRUT 2.0 and Jal Jeevan Mission.
- Selectively expanding into Hybrid Annuity Model (HAM) projects and entering new geographic territories like Odisha.
Threats (material, not boilerplate)
- Fluctuations in critical input costs like steel, cement, and electrical/mechanical components, which can compress margins under fixed-price contracts. risk_section
Why it matters: Input price increases directly impact EPC execution margins if price escalation clauses are absent or restricted. - Milestone-based payments and long certification timelines by government authorities causing severe working capital strains. risk_section
Why it matters: Delay in client invoices and retention money (₹563.35 million non-current retention in FY26) leads to cash flow mismatches.
Live Subscription Status
Total subscription is fed live from the exchange data feed. The category split (QIB, NII, retail) is not carried by that feed and is added by hand where it is material — so it is shown only when we have actually verified it, rather than left as blanks.
Allotment Status
Check your allotment on the registrar's portal → Registrar: Bigshare Services
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 (22 Sep 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.
Where is the money going?
Out of the Fresh Issue proceeds, the company has earmarked ₹1,500.00 million for funding its long-term working capital requirements for Fiscal 2027 to execute its unexecuted projects and support active bids. The balance is allocated for general corporate purposes and offer expenses.
RHP p. 136, 237How concentrated is the customer base?
The customer base is heavily concentrated. The top 10 customers contributed 95.68% of operating revenue in FY26 (₹3,300.85 million), 97.60% in FY25 (₹2,728.64 million), and 99.55% in FY24 (₹2,250.78 million), with Customer-1 representing 24.57% of total FY26 revenue.
RHP p. 299Is it profitable and growing?
Yes. Revenue from operations grew from ₹2,261.02 million in FY24 to ₹3,449.96 million in FY26 (a CAGR of 23.52%). PAT grew from ₹190.54 million in FY24 to ₹433.15 million in FY26, with EBITDA margin expanding from 15.49% to 20.92% over the same period.
RHP p. 150, 269, 270What sits in the footnotes / contingent liabilities?
The company has massive outstanding bank guarantees of ₹1,680.33 million as of March 31, 2026. Disputed tax demands challenge ₹99.79 million (₹7.81 million direct tax, ₹91.98 million indirect tax). Unsecured demand loans from related parties stand at ₹311.34 million. Additionally, criminal proceedings exist against promoters under IPC Sections 283, 290, and 431 regarding a worker excavation fatality.
RHP p. 96, 98, 405, 409, 534, 536Lock-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.
- 14 Feb 2028Minimum Promoters' Contribution18 months
- 14 Feb 2027Promoters' shareholding in excess of Minimum Promoters' Contribution6 months
- 14 Feb 2027Entire pre-offer equity share capital held by persons other than our Promoters6 months
- 12 Nov 2026Anchor Investors (50%)90 days
- 13 Sep 2026Anchor Investors (50%)30 days
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.
What Changed Between the DRHP and the RHP
Companies file a draft prospectus, then a final one. The changes in between are rarely reported, and they can be revealing.
| Item | In the DRHP | In the RHP / Addendum |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Information Period The restated consolidated financial information was rolled forward to cover full Fiscal 2026, dropping the oldest reporting year (Fiscal 2023) from the statements. | Restated consolidated financial statements for Fiscals 2025, 2024, and 2023 | Restated consolidated financial information for Fiscals 2026, 2025, and 2024 |
| Use of Proceeds (Working Capital Allocation) The estimated deployment of Fresh Issue proceeds allocated for the company's long-term working capital requirements was increased by ₹120.00 million. | ₹1,380.00 million | ₹1,500.00 million |
| Outstanding Litigations (Tax Proceedings against Company) Outstanding tax claims and disputes pending against the company grew in both case count (by 2 cases) and total disputed value (increasing by ₹68.45 million). | 6 tax proceedings involving an aggregate amount of ₹31.34 million | 8 tax proceedings involving an aggregate amount of ₹99.79 million |
| Company Secretary and Compliance Officer The company appointed Shefali Kesarwani as the new Company Secretary and Compliance Officer, replacing Saket Surolia prior to the RHP filing. | Saket Surolia | Shefali Kesarwani |
| Designated Stock Exchange BSE Limited was formally designated as the Designated Stock Exchange for the purposes of the public offering in the RHP. | [●] | BSE Limited |
| Industry Report (CRISIL Report) Date The third-party assessment report by CRISIL Intelligence was revised and updated to a July 2026 edition to capture rolled-forward industry metrics. | August 05, 2025 | July 2026 (pursuant to engagement letter read with corrigendum dated March 07, 2026) |
Educational, grounded entirely in the company's filings (DRHP/RHP). Not investment advice. FinMinutes does not provide buy/sell recommendations.
