p) Provisions, contingent assets and contingent liabilities

Provisions are recognized only when there is a present obligation, as a result of past events, and when a reliable
estimate of the amount of obligation can be made at the reporting date. These estimates are reviewed at each reporting
date and adjusted to reflect the current best estimates. Provisions are discounted to their present values, where the
time value of money is material.

Contingent liability is disclosed for:

• Possible obligations which will be confirmed only by future events not wholly within the control of the Company,
or

• Present obligations arising from past events where it is not probable that an outflow of resources will be required
to settle the obligation or a reliable estimate of the amount of the obligation cannot be made.

Contingent liabilities may arise from litigation, taxation and other claims against the Company. The contingent liabilities
are disclosed where it is management's assessment that the outcome of any litigation and other claims against the
Company is uncertain or cannot be reliably quantified, unless the likelihood of an adverse outcome is remote.

Contingent assets are not recognised. However, when inflow of economic benefit is probable, related asset is disclosed.

q) Earnings per share

Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividing the net profit or loss for the period attributable to equity shareholders
(after deducting attributable taxes) by the weighted average number of equity shares outstanding during the period.
The weighted average number of equity shares outstanding during the period is adjusted for events including a bonus
issue.

For the purpose of calculating diluted earnings per share, the net profit or loss for the period attributable to equity
shareholders and the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period are adjusted for the effects of
all dilutive potential equity shares.

r) Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for consistency with the current year presentation. Such
reclassification does not have any impact on the current year financial statements.

s) Recent accounting pronouncements:

Standards issued/amended and became effective

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs notified new standards or amendment to existing standards under Companies (Indian
Accounting Standards) Rules as issued from time to time. The Company has applied following amendments for the
first-time during the current year which are effective from 01 April 2024.

Amendments to Ind AS 116 - Lease liability in a sale and leaseback

The amendments require an entity to recognise lease liability including variable lease payments which are not linked
to index or a rate in a way it does not result into gain on Right of Use asset it retains.

Ind AS 117 - Insurance Contracts

MCA notified Ind AS 117, a comprehensive standard that prescribe, recognition, measurement and disclosure
requirements, to avoid diversities in practice for accounting insurance contracts and it applies to all companies i.e., to
all "insurance contracts" regardless of the issuer. However, Ind AS 117 is not applicable to the entities which are
insurance companies registered with IRDAI.

The Company has reviewed the new pronouncements and based on its evaluation has determined that above
amendments do not have a significant impact on the Company's Standalone Financial Statements.

Standards issued but not yet effective

Ministry of Corporate Affairs ("MCA") notifies new standards or amendments to the existing standards under Companies
(Indian Accounting Standards) Rules as issued from time to time. As at 31 March 2025, MCA has not notified any new
standards or amendments to the existing standards applicable to the Company.

3. Significant management accounting judgements, estimates and assumptions

The preparation of the Company's standalone financial statements requires management to make judgements, estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities, and the accompanying
disclosures, and the disclosure of contingent liabilities. The estimates and assumptions are based on historical experience
and other factors that are considered to be relevant. The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing
basis and any revisions thereto are recognized in the period of revision and future periods if the revision affects both the
current and future periods. Uncertainties about these assumptions and estimates could result in outcomes that require a
material adjustment to the carrying amount of assets or liabilities affected in future periods.

The key assumptions concerning the future and other key sources of estimation uncertainty at the reporting date, that
have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next
financial year, are described below. The Company based its assumptions and estimates on parameters available when the
standalone financial statements were prepared. Existing circumstances and assumptions about future developments,
however, may change due to market changes or circumstances arising that are beyond the control of the Company. Such
changes are reflected in the assumptions when they occur.

Defined benefit plans

The cost of the defined benefit gratuity plan and the present value of the gratuity obligation are determined using actuarial
valuations. An actuarial valuation involves making various assumptions that may differ from actual developments in the
future. These include the determination of the discount rate, future salary increases and mortality rates. Due to the
complexities involved in the valuation and its long-term nature, a defined benefit obligation is highly sensitive to changes in
these assumptions. All assumptions are reviewed at each reporting date. Information about the various estimates and
assumptions made in determining the present value of defined benefit obligations are disclosed in note 37.

Fair value measurements

In estimating the fair value of financial assets and financial liabilities, the Company uses market observable data to the
extent available. Where such Level 1 inputs are not available, the Company establishes appropriate valuation techniques
and inputs to the model. The inputs to these models are taken from observable markets where possible, but where this is
not feasible, a degree of judgement is required in establishing fair values. Judgements include considerations of inputs
such as liquidity risk, credit risk and volatility. Changes in assumptions about these factors could affect the reported fair
value of financial instruments. Information about the valuation techniques and inputs used in determining the fair value of
various assets and liabilities are disclosed in note 40.

Impairment of non-financial assets

Impairment exists when the carrying value of an asset or cash generating unit exceeds its recoverable amount, which is the
higher of its fair value less costs of disposal and its value in use. The fair value less costs of disposal calculation is based on
available data from binding sales transactions, conducted at arm's length, for similar assets or observable market prices
less incremental costs for disposing of the asset.

Impairment of property, plant and equipment

Determining whether property, plant and equipment are impaired requires an estimation of the value in use of the relevant
cash generating units. The value in use calculation is based on a Discounted Cash Flow model over the estimated useful life
of the Power Plants. Further, the cash flow projections are based on estimates and assumptions relating to tariff, operational
performance of the Plants, life extension plans, market prices of coal and other fuels, exchange variations, inflation, terminal
value etc. which are considered reasonable by the Management

Impairment of Investments made / Loans given to subsidiaries

In case of investments made and loans given by the Company to its subsidiaries, the Management assesses whether there
is any indication of impairment in the value of investments and loans. The carrying amount is compared with the present
value of future net cash flow of the subsidiaries based on its business model or estimates is made of the fair value of the
identified assets held by the subsidiaries, as applicable.

Taxes

Significant management judgement is required to determine the amount of deferred tax assets that can be recognised,
based upon the likely timing and the level of future taxable profits together with future tax planning strategies, including
estimates of temporary differences reversing on account of available benefits under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Deferred tax assets are recognised for unused tax losses to the extent that it is probable that taxable profit will be available
against which the losses can be utilised.

Useful lives of depreciable/ amortisable assets

The Company estimates useful life of each class of assets based on its nature, the estimated usage, the operating condition,
past history of replacement, anticipated technological changes, etc. The Company reviews the useful life of property, plant
and equipment and Intangible assets as at the end of each reporting period. This reassessment may result in change in
depreciation expense in future periods.

Income/ Revenue

Revenue from sale of power is recognised upon judgement by the management for recoverability of the claims based on
the relevant contractual terms / provisional rates as provided by the regulator / governing tariff regulations, to the extent
applicable, having regard to mechanism provided in applicable tariff regulations and the bilateral arrangement with the
customers, which may be subject to adjustments in future years, on receipt of final orders of the respective Regulatory
Authorities or final closure of the matter with the customers.

In certain cases, the Company has claimed compensation from the Discoms based on management's interpretation of the
regulatory orders and various technical parameters, which are subject to final verification and confirmation by the respective
Discoms and hence, in these cases, the revenues have been recognised during various financial years / periods on a prudent
basis with conservative parameters in the books in accordance with the terms of Power Purchase Agreement. The necessary
true-up adjustments for revenue Claims (including carrying cost / delayed payment surcharge) are made in the books on
final acknowledgement / regulatory orders / settlement of matters with respective Discoms or eventual recovery of the
claims, whichever is earlier.

Classification of Trade Receivables

In view of pending litigations on regulatory matters, the classification of disputed / undisputed trade receivables is a matter
of judgement based on facts and circumstances. The Company evaluates the fact pattern and circumstances, including
ongoing discussions with the state-owned power distribution Companies (Discom), for each such regulatory matter pending
to be adjudicated by the relevant authority. In cases, where discussions with Discom have not made reasonable progress
and matters are subjudice, the related receivables are classified as disputed, even though the management is reasonably
confident of recovering the dues in full, backed by the regulatory orders in favour of the Company. The management will
continue to monitor the developments on regulatory matters.

i Non current and current secured borrowings are secured by first mortgage and charge on all immovable and movable
assets, both present and future, of the Amravati Project (refer note 17 and 43).

ii As at 31 March 2025, certain projects have experienced temporary delays due to supply chain/ labour force disruptions and
other factors beyond Company's control. However, based on management's assessment, these delays are not considered
indicators of impairment under Ind AS 36. The Company is already taking steps to resume active development on these
projects in due course and shall continue to monitor their progress periodically. None of the Company's projects are
temporarily suspended.

iii The Company does not have any capital-work-in progress that has significantly exceeded its cost compared to its original
plan.

i) During the previous year, the Company on 22 June 2023 had availed refinancing facility in form of non-convertible
debentures (NCDs) and rupee term loan (RTL) aggregating to ' 1,114.10 crore in a transaction led by Kotak Mahindra
Bank and had utilized such proceeds to repay the dues (including interest) of existing facilities of Aditya Birla ARC
Limited ("ABARC"), within the agreed extended timelines.

ii) Inter corporate deposit given to Poena Power Development Limited (PPDL) is secured by pledge of 50,000 equity
shares of PPDL and is to be used towards RPS Shortfall amount when due (also refer footnote (v) below).

iii) Repayment schedule of loan facilities (as per contractually agreed terms) is as follows:

a) Facility C - Repayable in bullet repayment of ' 337.52 Crore (balance amount after prepayment) in June 2027.

b) Elevated intercorporate deposit - Repayable in bullet repayment of ' 550 Crore in June 2027.

c) Subordinate intercorporate deposit - Repayable in bullet repayment of ' 900 Crore in September 2027

d) Intercorporate deposit - Repayable in bullet repayment of ' 31.35 Crore after repayments of all external borrowings.

e) 0.001% OCCRPS - Redeemable in bullet repayment of ' 376.92 Crore upon completion of 7 years from the date of
allotment i.e. 23 December 2019 and if OCCRPS are not redeemed, the same shall be convertible into Equity
shares at the option of lenders.

f) Non-convertible debentures - Series II (NCD Series II) - Repayable quarterly in equal instalment of ' 75 Crore each
starting from March 2025 and balance in last instalment.

g) Non-convertible debentures - Series III (NCD Series III) - Redeemable in bullet repayment of ' 160.15 Crore (principal
amount) along with interest accrued, in December 2026.

iv) The above mentioned loans and intercorporate deposits carry contractual rate of interest ranging from 0.001% p.a. to
20% p.a. over the tenure of the loan.

v) The Company, under the One Time Settlement scheme (OTS), had issued Redeemable Preference Shares (RPS) in
December 2019 to the lenders of the Company, that had become redeemable on 27 December 2021. However, inspite
of having sufficient cash and cash equivalent balance, the redemption of such RPS could not be done due to limitations
as per the provisions of section 55(2) of the Act which state that such redemption is permissible only out of profits
earned by the Company which are otherwise available for dividend, after adjusting the accumulated losses as read
with section 123 of the Act, or out of the proceeds of a fresh issue of shares made for the purposes of such redemption.
The Company has been in active discussions with the RPS holders to extend the time period for redemption of RPS,
however, the approval from the lenders is awaited as on date. The liability towards RPS has been presented as 'current
financial liabilities' in these standalone financial statements.

During the year ended 31 March 2025, one of the RPS holders, holding 28,720,978 RPS aggregating to ' 28.72 crore in
the Company, had filed an application against the Company and subsidiary company- Poena Power Development
Limited ('PPDL') (whose shares are pledged with RPS holders and inter-corporate deposit given of ' 250 crore is also
assigned to RPS holders), under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('IBC Code') on 26 April 2024,
which is not yet admitted, demanding redemption of the principal amount along with interest and dividend.

The management based upon inputs from legal experts and relying upon relevant favorable judicial pronouncement,
is of the view that the application filed under Section 7 of IBC Code is not maintainable under applicable laws and
believes that the same is not expected to have any material impact on these standalone financial statements and/or
on the operations and functioning of the Company.

vi) During the year, the Company has repaid/prepaid ' 98.15 Crore against NCD Series I, ' 128.57 Crore against NCD Series
II, ' 83.70 Crore against NCD Series III and ' 23.94 Crore against RTL as per the terms of the Facilities Agreement.
Subsequent to such repayments, NCD's Series I and RTL stands repaid in full as at 31 March 2025.

vii) NCD Series I, II and RTLs aggregating to ' 725 Crore is secured by way of*:

a) first mortgage and charge on all immovable and movable assets, both present and future, of the Amravati Project.

b) pledge of 2,097,598,310 equity shares of the Company held by RattanIndia Enterprises Limited (formerly RattanIndia
Infrastructure Limited ("REL") and RR Infralands Private Limited through execution of a Deed of Pledge amongst
REL, RR Infralands Private Limited (Pledgers), Company and Vistra (ITCL) India Limited

c) an exclusive first ranking charge over all the promoters ICDs/unsecured debts; and

d) corporate guarantee of RR Infralands Private Limited to the extent of the value of outstanding under these facilities.

viii) NCD Series III aggregating to ' 375 Crore is secured by way of*:

a) second mortgage and charge on all immovable and movable assets, both present and future, of the Amravati
Project.

b) pledge of 2,097,598,310 equity shares of the Company held by RattanIndia Enterprises Limited (formerly RattanIndia
Infrastructure Limited ("REL") and RR Infralands Private Limited through execution of a Deed of Pledge amongst
REL, RR Infralands Private Limited (Pledgers), Company and Vistra (ITCL) India Limited

c) an exclusive second ranking charge over all the promoters ICDs/unsecured debts; and

d) corporate guarantee of RR Infralands Private Limited to the extent of the value of outstanding under such facility.

The Company's contract with customers for the sale of electricity generally include one performance obligation. Revenue
from sale of power is recognized net of cash discount, over time when each unit of electricity is delivered, at the contracted
rate.

A contract asset is the right to consideration in exchange for goods or services transferred to the customer. If the Company
performs by transferring goods or services to a customer before the customer pays consideration or before payment is due,
a contract asset is recognised for the earned consideration that is conditional. A contract liability is the obligation to transfer
goods or services to a customer for which the Company has received consideration from the customer. Contract liabilities
are recognised as revenue when the Company performs obligations under the contract.

32 Details of contingent liabilities, pending litigations and other matters:

A. Claims against the Company not acknowledged as debt:

1. During the year ended 31 March 2022, the Company had filed writ petition before Hon'ble Delhi High Court ('Delhi
HC') and had sought relief and direction to Ministry of Power and Ministry of Coal as well as Western Coalfields
Limited ('WCL') and Mahanadi Coalfields Limited ('MCL'), the subsidiaries of Coal India Limited, for returning of Bank
Guarantees issued pursuant to Letter of Assurance (LOA), as the Fuel Supply Agreement (FSA) against this LOA was not
materialized and Company had not utilized this for any coal supply to the plant. Subsequently during the quarter
ended 30 June 2022, The Company had received letters from WCL & MCL informing cancellation of LOA and invocation
of bank guarantee amounting to ' 54.96 crore. The Company had filed an application of stay before Delhi HC and in
response thereto, the Delhi HC had directed WCL & MCL not to take any coercive action pursuant to their letters. The
Company based upon inputs from legal experts believes that it has a strong case and accordingly, no provision is
considered necessary in these standalone financial statements at this stage.

2 During the year ended 2010-11, the Company had entered into a contract with Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited ('BHEL')
for erection and supply of certain material including boiler turbine generator package, for phase II of its thermal
power project at Amravati. Consequent to such original contract, BHEL supplied certain material that were not warranted
at that relevant time and there were various communication made by the Company with BHEL requesting for taking
away such excess material from the project site. Subsequently, BHEL initiated arbitration proceedings against the
Company, alleging the outstanding payment against claims towards supply and services, taxes thereon, loss of profit,
corporate and other overheads etc., due to breach of terms of the Supply Contract and Service Contract.

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi disposed off the petition in earlier year, with the instruction to the parties that petition
before Hon'ble High Court be treated as an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
before the Arbitral Tribunal. The arguments have been concluded under the said arbitration during the year. The
award has been reserved in the said matter.

In April 2016, BHEL had also filed separate application under Section 31(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996 Act, before the Arbitral Tribunal, seeking interim award of ' 115 crores, as part payment towards supply and
services. The Hon'ble Tribunal had heard arguments of both the parties and an interim award of ' 115 crores against
the Company was passed vide order dated 27 July 2017. Subsequently, the Company had filed a petition against the
said interim award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act before the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi, that has been dismissed vide order dated 06 March 2025 by the Single Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
Pursuant to the above, the Company has filed an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
before the Division bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 05 April 2025, that is yet to be heard and is currently
pending disposal.

In response to another application filed on 02 May 2023, the Hon'ble High Court Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide
separate order dated 08 August 2023 had allowed attachment of certain assets in connection with the interim award
dated 27 July 2017, subject to any prior charge already created on the said assets in favour of third parties.

As per the Company, BHEL's claim for supply is not tenable as BHEL's act of dumping of material at site in a non¬
sequential manner was completely contrary to the agreed terms of contract and further, the claims for loss of profit
and corporate and other overheads are completely frivolous. The management, based on inputs from its legal experts
and merits of the case, is of the view that the Company has strong position in the said matter and is taking all necessary
steps to protect its interests and the likelihood of any additional liability devolving on the Company (other than those
already recorded) is not probable and there is no additional impact, requiring any adjustment in these standalone
financial statements.

3 Arbitration Proceedings had been initiated by Larsen and Toubro Ltd (L&T) against the Company in relation to the
supply and service contracts for Electrical Balance of Plant (EBOP) with respect to 5X270 MW Thermal Power Plant,
Amravati. A preliminary hearing in respect of the matter was held whereby schedule of the arbitration proceedings
had been fixed by the Arbitral Tribunal. Application filed by RPL under section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 with prayer that the Arbitral Tribunal doesn't have jurisdiction over RPL to adjudicate alleged disputes had
been rejected vide order dated 01 March 2021 and the Company was directed to file its statement of defence along
with supporting documents and admission denial. Pleadings and arguments have been completed in the matter. The
award has been reserved on 08 October 2024.

4 Arbitration Proceedings had been initiated by Larsen and Toubro Ltd (L&T) against the Company in relation to supply
and service contract with respect to the Coal Handling Plant (CHP) of 2x1600 TPH capacity for 5x270 MW TPP, Amravati.
Preliminary hearing in respect of the matter was held on 17 June 2020 whereby schedule of the arbitration proceeding
had been fixed by the Arbitral Tribunal. An Application for inspection and production of documents had been filed by
Larsen and Toubro Ltd (L&T). Reply had also been filed, and arguments have been heard. The Arbitral Tribunal Vide
order dated 28 March 2022, had rejected all the contentions of Larsen and Toubro Ltd (L&T) except granting inspection
of original invoices by L&T. Inspection of documents has been completed. The matter is currently at the stage of
claimant's evidence. The next dates of hearings are 14, 15 and 16 July 2025.

5 Arbitration Proceedings had been initiated by M/s. Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Pvt. Ltd (SPCL) against the Company in
relation to the supply and service contracts for Civil Works with respect to 5X270 MW Thermal Power Plant, Amravati.
Pleadings are completed in the matter. In the meantime, mandate extension application filed by SPCL under Section
29A of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was dismissed by Delhi High Court vide Order dated 30 May 2023. Aggrieved
by the order, SPCL had preferred SLP bearing no. 17877 of 2023 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Pleadings
are completed. Matter is listed for final arguments on 19 August 2025.

6 An application under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was filed by SPCL against the Company to initiate
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the IBC Code before National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.
The Hon'ble Tribunal vide order dated 16 November 2022 dismissed the petition filed by SPCL. SPCL had filed an
appeal against the said order before the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. The next date of hearing
is 15 May 2025.

7 Techno Industries invoked arbitration against the Company pertaining to a Letter of Award for construction of Lifts and
Elevators at Thermal Power Project, Phase I, Amravati. Pursuant to a section 11 petition allowed by the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi, the Sole Arbitrator was appointed. During the year, arguments have been concluded, and award delivered
on 27 January 2025 was pronounced. The Company has challenged the award, passed by the Sole Arbitrator, in the
arbitration initiated by the Techno Industries, before Saket District Court. Notice has already been issued to the
respondent and now, the matter is listed on 16 May 2025 for further hearing.

8 Ion Exchange India Limited invoked arbitration against the Company pertaining to a contract entered in June 2012 for
supply, storage, handling, erection and commissioning services and for civil and structural works of sewage and waste
water management system of 1350 (5 x 270) MW Thermal Power Project, Phase I, Amravati, Maharashtra. Pursuant to
that, Ion Exchange India Limited had filed application under Section 11. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide its order
dated 10 November 2021 appointed Retd. judge to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. Preliminary hearing
was conducted and the schedule for Arbitration was fixed. The Company had challenged the appointment of the
arbitral tribunal (Section 16) by filing an application stating that the present arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction to
entertain the matter as there was no contract between Ion Exchange and the Company. The Tribunal vide its order
dated 07 July 2022, held that the Section 16 application be kept pending till the filing of Statement of Defence and
conclusion of evidence by both the Parties. Pleadings have been completed in the matter. The arbitral award was
passed on 01 December 2023. An appeal challenging the award has been filed before Patiala House Court. The next
date of hearing is 14 May 2025.

9 An application had been filed by Vintech under provisions of section 18(1) of (delayed payment) of the MSMED Act,
2006 seeking a claim against invoices raised on the Company pursuant to work order relating to annual maintenance
work contract of lighting, cabling and 33kv transmission line at thermal power plant, Amravati. The Company has filed
its reply as well as statement of accounts with documents. Next date of hearing is yet to be intimated.

10 Value Line invoked arbitration against the Company pertaining to a contract entered into in April, 2015 between the
parties for interior fit-out works for the office. Pursuant to that, Value Line filed section 11 petition before the High
Court of Delhi vide Arb. Pet. 844 of 2019. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide order dated 17 December 2019 appointed
Sole-arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute and defences between the parties. Preliminary Hearing was held on 06 February
2020, wherein schedule of the arbitration was decided. Issues have been framed and Value line has filed its Affidavit of
Evidence. It is currently listed for claimant's arguments. The award has been delivered on 27 August 2024 and thereby,
the claim of Valueline has been rejected. Valueline has challenged the award before District & Session Judge, Saket,
New Delhi, under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act. The next date of hearing in the matter is 07 August
2025.

11 During the financial year 2015-16, Tahsildar of Amravati vide it's order dated 24 February 2016 had directed the Company
to deposit the amount of ' 4.00 crore towards payment of royalty for using the minor minerals excavated during the
construction of the power plant of the Company and utilized in the embankment work of railway line on the plot of
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Limited ("MIDC") allotted to the Company. The Company filed a writ
petition before the Nagpur bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court against the order passed by Tahsildar. The Hon'ble
Court vide its Order dated 15 December 2016 had issued a stay in the matter. The next date of hearing in the matter is
to be intimated.

12 A vendor had under taken work for supply, plantation and maintenance of 100,000 trees at the Company's power
plant pursuant to work order dated 25 May 2012. The Company terminated the contract vide letter dated 6 February
2014 due to unsatisfactory performance and also claimed liquidated damages from the vendor. On termination of
contract by the Company, vendor alleged that the contract was wrongly terminated by the Company, only to avoid
outstanding payment. The vendor had filed a Civil Suit on 03 December 2015 before Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati
claiming ' 1.16 crore and court fees of ' 0.02 crore against the work done. The Company had filed an application
under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for dismissal of the suit. The matter is now listed on 25 June
2025.

13 Becquerel Industries Private Limited had filed a suit for recovery of ' 0.21 crore against M/s Preeti Engineering before
Civil Court at Nagpur on 15 April 2015 alleging that their dues are pending against M/s Preeti Engineering to whom the
Non-Distractive Testing work had been sublet by M/s Brothers Engineering. The work to M/s Brothers Engineering was
subcontracted by BHEL to whom contract was awarded by the Company. The summons were serviced to M/s Preeti
Engineering, M/s Bothers Engineering, BHEL and the Company. The Company had filed its reply. The matter is now
listed for hearing on 12 June 2025.

14 A Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation ('PIL') had been registered before Hon'ble Bombay High Court on 27 August 2014
with regards to the occupational hazards of the employees working in various thermal power plant stations in the
country. The Company (due to its plant at Amravati) had been made a party in the said PIL. The Company had filed its
reply before Bombay High Court. The Hon'ble High Court has appointed one committee for regular review of the
situation in Thermal Power Plants in the state. The next date of hearing in the matter is to be intimated.

15 Arbitration proceedings have been initiated against the Company in relation to lease premises by Raman Anil and
Associates Pvt. Ltd., before Shri Vinod Jain District and Sessions Judge Retd. Sole Arbitrator. Claimant had submitted its
statement of claim and the non-claimant has been directed to file its statement of defense before 14 June 2025. Next
date of hearing is on 17 June 2025.

The management basis inputs from legal experts has assessed that likelihood of any liability devolving upon the Company
in respect of the above matters is not probable and accordingly, no adjustment is currently required in these standalone
financial statements.

B. i) Direct tax matters:-

1 For AY 2012-13 to AY 2017-18, the Honourable Income- tax Appellate Tribunal ('ITAT' or 'Tribunal') in its order
dated 5 May 2021 decided the matter related to certain disallowances/addition aggregating to ' 835.30 crore, in
favour of the Company. However, on accessing the Honourable High Court of Mumbai portal, the Company noted
that department has filed appeals against the ITAT Order for AY 2012-13 to 2017-18, which are yet to be admitted
by the HC. Currently, the Company has not received any hearing notice in this regard.

2 For AY 2018-19, in response to the appeal filed by the Department against the order of CIT (Appeals) in relation to
certain disallowance/ additions aggregating to ' 33.66 crore, the Honourable Tribunal in its order dated 21 March
2023 has decided the matter in Company's favour, subject to the calculation/ checking of additions as per the
provisions of section 115JB of the Income- tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer, which is currently pending
disposal.

3 For AY 2009-10, the Company has filed rectification application under section 154 against demand of ' 0.15 crore
for not giving the credit of advance tax and self-assessment tax of merged entity, which is currently pending for
disposal.

The management basis inputs from experts has assessed that likelihood of any liability devolving upon the Company
in respect of the above matters is not probable and accordingly, no adjustment is currently required in these
standalone financial statements.

ii) Indirect tax matters

1 The Company had filed claim with Joint DGFT, Mumbai amounting to ' 39.79 crore during the year 2010-11 and
onwards on account of deemed drawback for the material supplies for the construction of power plant at Amravati.
Out of this, an amount of ' 6.37 crore was processed and order for refund was issued during the financial year
2010-11. The said order was later withdrawn by the Joint DGFT vide its order dated 07 April 2011 due to clarification
given by policy interpretation committee in its meeting no -10 on 15 March 2011. The Company had filed a writ
petition on 01 September 2017 before Hon'ble Bombay High Court for recovery of deemed drawback of ' 3.70
crore which is under process. Also, an appeal had been filed on 12 July 2016 before Hon'ble Supreme Court for
' 36.09 crore which is also under process for final hearing.

2 Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Mumbai issued show cause notice demanding Service-tax of ' 7.57 crore
on irrigation restoration charges paid to Water Resource Department of Maharashtra Government under reverse
charge mechanism. Further the Principal Commissioner of Goods & Service Tax, Delhi had also confirmed above
demand along with penalty vide its order dated 10 December 2020. Aggrieved of the above order, the Company
had filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court on 15 March 2021 and Court vide order dated 13
March 2023 had dismissed the petition and had allowed the Company to file appeal before Customs, Excise and
Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Subsequently, the Company has filed appeal before Tribunal on 10 April 2023, that
is pending for disposal and has also deposited ' 0.57 crore under protest.

The management basis inputs from experts has assessed that likelihood of any liability devolving upon the Company
in respect of the above matters is not probable and accordingly, no adjustment is currently required in these
standalone financial statements.

C. Claims filed by the Company:

1 The Company is supplying power to Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL) based on
two power purchase agreements (PPAs) for supply of 1200 MW (450 MW 750 MW respectively) of power for the
period of 25 years. The PPAs were executed based on the fuel supply agreement (FSA) which provided that domestic
coal linkages would be available to meet the fuel requirements. However, adequate coal supply was not made available
which adversely impacted cost as Company had to source fuel from alternate sources to meet the shortfall of coal
supplied under FSA with coal supplier. The Cabinet Committee of Economic Affairs (CCEA) approved mechanism where
after Ministry of Coal amended the National Coal Distribution Policy (NCDP) and communicated its decision to allow
pass through of the incremental cost of procuring coal from alternative sources to meet the shortfall in supply of
domestic coal under coal linkage.

The Company filed a petition before Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission ('MERC' or 'the Commission') in
year 2013 for realizing the shortfall in supply under NCDP. MERC vide its Order on 15 July 2014 and 20 August 2014 laid
down methodology to recover compensatory fuel charges.

On 28 August 2014, the Company filed a review petition before MERC against the Orders dated 15 July 2014 as well as
Order dated 20 August 2014 and MSEDCL further filed review petition against the Orders of MERC dated 20 August
2014. The review petition filed by MSEDCL got dismissed vide Order dated 16 July 2015 and the review petition filed
by the Company also got dismissed vide Order dated 30 October 2015.

As at the balance sheet date, the Company has accounted such claims in the books of accounts aggregating to
' 308.91 crore and related carrying cost & late payment surcharge thereon.

The Company then filed appeals before Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) against Orders dated 15 July 2014, 20
August 2014 and 30 October 2015. The said appeals were disposed off by the Hon'ble Tribunal on 4 May 2017, remanding
the matters to MERC for fresh adjudication in the light of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Energy
Watchdog and Ors. v/s CERC and Ors. dated 11 April 2017. MERC heard the matter and passed the orders on 03 April
2018 providing a mechanism for computation of the compensation amounts. The Company filed an appeal before the
Hon'ble APTEL vide appeal no. 264 of 2018 against the Ld. MERC order dated 03 April 2018. The appeal was disposed
off vide order dated 13 November 2020 in which prayer of the Company was allowed and matter was remanded to Ld.
MERC for computation.

Subsequently, the Company had filed remand petition vide Case No. 240 of 2020 before Ld. MERC. Also, aggrieved by
the APTEL Order No. 264 of 2018 dated 13 November 2020, MSEDCL preferred a Civil Appeal No. 1805 of 2021 on 12
March 2021 in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

MERC pronounced the order on 16 November 2021 in Case No. 240 of 2020 directing RPL to submit Supplementary
invoice after making changes as suggested in the order and MSEDCL to make the payment within due date. Accordingly,
the Company recomputed its Change in Law claims and submitted Supplementary invoice to MSEDCL. Aggrieved by
MERC Order dated 16 November 2022, RPL filed an appeal vide Appeal No. 216 of 2023 in APTEL to set aside Order
passed by MERC in case no 240 of 2020. The next date of hearing is to be intimated.

RPL has also filed Interim Application in Case No 240/2021 vide 153/MP/2021 praying MERC for directing MSEDCL to
release 75% payment as interim measure, which was also dismissed by MERC stating matter is sub-judiced in Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1805/2021 and directed to follow Hon'ble Supreme Court Order. Hon'ble Supreme
Court vide its hearing dated 14 February 2022 directed MSEDCL to pay 50% of total claimed amount. The matter was
listed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and written submissions were filed. The matter was referred to the Hon'ble
Chief Justice's court and thereafter tagged with case (C.A.No.4143/2020). The Supreme Court vide order dated 27
March 2023 in Civil Appeal No. 1805/2021 disposed off the appeal filed by MSEDCL.

2 The Company filed a petition with MERC on 15 June 2016 claiming approval of additional components of costs under
change in law. MERC had issued order dated 5 April 2018 in this respect. The Company had filed an appeal vide Appeal
No. 263 of 2018 against the order dated 05 April 2018 before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal for Electricity ("APTEL")
on 06 June 2018. APTEL had remanded the matter to Hon'ble Commission for quantification of amount payable to
generator and pass consequential Order. MERC vide order dated 06 February 2023 has partly allowed the petition of
the Company. Aggrieved by the said order, MSEDCL has filed a Review Petition before the MERC which was dismissed
on 20 February 2024. An appeal has also been filed by the Company against the order dated 06 February 2023 before
APTEL, wherein vide order dated 06 October 2023 APTEL has partially allowed the appeal of the Company and remanded
the matter to MERC for fresh adjudication. Aggrieved by the said order, the Company has preferred a Civil Appeal
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 8232 of 2023) challenging the order of APTEL dated 06 October
2023. In the hearing before the Registrar Court of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Ld. Registrar granted 4 weeks' time to
MSEDCL for filing of counter affidavit. MSEDCL filed its reply and rejoinder has also been filed by the Company. The
next date of hearing is to be intimated.

3 The Company operates a 1350 MW (5x270 MW) coal based power plant located at Nandgaonpeth, Amravati district in
the state of Maharashtra. At the time of commissioning, the performance guarantee test conducted by BHEL noted
that the maximum generation at rated capacity was up to 277.8MW (in non VWO mode), which corresponds to ex-bus
capacity upto 252 MW. This was further corroborated by the CPRI report. In view of above, the Company requested
MSLDC to increase the ex-bus export capacity for all five units from 252MW to 258 MW, however MSLDC rejected the
Company's request, accordingly the Company filed petition vide Case No. 59 of 2018 before the Ld. MERC under
Sections 32, 33 and 86 of The Electricity Act, 2003 read with the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (State
Grid Code) Regulations, 2006. The matter was heard by MERC on 3 October 2018 and had reserved its order. The Ld.
MERC has dismissed the Case No. 59 of 2018 vide Order dated 23 October 2018. RPL has preferred an appeal against
the impugned order of the Ld. MERC before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal of Electricity vide Appeal No. 35 of 2019.
Appeal has been admitted by the Hon'ble APTEL and pleadings have to be completed. Subsequently, RPL has filed
application for seeking directions against BHEL for conducting Performance Test. The Hon'ble Tribunal vide order
dated 18 December 2019 directed BHEL to give test report. However, BHEL has filed review petition against the said
order vide RP 04 of 2020. The APTEL vide order dated 01 September 2023 condoned the delay in filing the reply and
rejoinder in the matter. APTEL further allowed BHEL's Review Petition inter alia on the grounds that Order dated 18
December 2019 was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. APTEL directed that Appeal No. 35 of 2019
filed by RPL would be taken up in its own turn. The next date of hearing is to be intimated.

4 The Company had filed an Appeal vide DFR 345/2021 before Appellate Tribunal of Electricity ("APTEL") under Section
111 of the Electricity Act, 2003 praying for setting aside the Order dated 28 July 2021 passed by Maharashtra Electricity
Regulatory Commission ("MERC") in Case No 24 of 2017 insofar as the observation qua Company undertaking dated
05 April 2018. Pleadings are complete. The next date of hearing is to be intimated.

5 The Company had filed Writ Petition before Delhi High Court for quashing or setting aside the four Notifications dated
08 December 2017 passed by Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC). The CERC vide the Impugned
Notifications, has amended/revised the escalation rates for domestic coal chargeable by generating companies with
retrospective effect going back as far the year 2012 up to 2014. Based on these amendments, tariff applicable during
the period got changed and there was financial impact on the generators having Power Purchase Agreements with
Discoms through Case-1 bidding route. The matter is listed for hearing on 08 May 2025.

6 The Company has filed an Appeal before Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal (APTEL) challenging the Order passed by Hon'ble
Ld. Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission ("MERC") wherein Ld. MERC had rejected the claim towards levy
of Surface Transportation charges, Crushing/ Sizing charges, Levy of Port Congestion Charges and expenses incurred
towards fly ash transportation as Change in Law. Judgement reserved on 26 March 2025.

7 The Company had filed a petition before the Ld. Maharashtra State Electricity Regulatory Commission for compensation
on account of mandatory use of washed coal by Company's Amravati Power Plant impacting revenues and costs related
to procurement of coal by the Company. MERC had disallowed claims of the Company. An Appeal has been filed by the
Company against MERC Order. The next date of the hearing is to be intimated.

8 The Company has filed petition in MERC seeking compensation on account of "change in law" events pertaining to
imposition of Forest Cess on coal lifted from Gevra Coal Mines and lifting of coal through RCR mode. MERC vide Order
dated 18 June 2024 has partly allowed the reliefs sought by the Company. An appeal has been filed by the Company
before APTEL against MERC. Matter is currently included in list of finals and the next date of hearing is to be intimated.

9 Appeal No. 382 of 2022 (DFR 387/2022) has been filed by the Company against MERC order seeking the following
relief:- (a) Damages for Inordinate delay in making payments and default in complying with the material obligations
under the Power Purchase Agreements executed between the parties. On account of the said default, the Appellant
could not procure coal and operate the power plant to its optimum capacity to recover the full Capacity Charges; and
(b) Amounts deducted/short payments from Capacity Charges due to alleged over-injection during FY 2013-14 to July
2016. Next date of hearing is to be notified.

10 The Company has filed petition seeking refund of differential amount of ' 7.72 Crore payable by MSEDCL towards
difference between commercial tariff and industrial tariff levied for supply of start-up power under Section 86 of the
Electricity Act, 2003 read with Regulation 32 of MERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 for the period October
2012 to February 2014, along with applicable interest/ carrying cost.

11 An interlocutory application has been filed by the Company against Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd.("Corporate Debtor")
before NCLT Delhi in case no. 2561 of 2019 titled "Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Pvt. Ltd. vs Sinnar Thermal Power
Ltd." to treat the amount of ' 7.94 crore disbursed by the Company to Corporate Debtor between 26 September 2022
and 19 January 2024 as Insolvency Resolution Process cost in ongoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of
"Sinnar Thermal Power Limited". The next date of hearing is 22 May 2025.

The management basis inputs from legal experts has assessed that all the above are eligible claims as per terms of PPA
entered with MSEDCL/ applicable regulations and the likelihood of favourable outcome in all the above matters is
virtually certain.

D. Other pending litigations :

1 The Company had filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) seeking directions
against Water Resources Department, Amravati to take decision on the request of the Company for the partial surrender
of 27.60 million cubic metres of Water and the refund of proportionate amount of Irrigation Restoration Charges and
Water Commitment Charges already paid for the year 2016-17. The Hon'ble Court vide its judgment dated 10 February
2023 partially allowed the Company's petition and held partial surrender will be treated as approved after deposit of
balance irrigation restoration charges demanded at rate of ' 0.01 crore per hectare, as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India order dated 13 January 2023, as enumerated in note 33. The Company has filed SLP No. 21251/2023 before
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India challenging the order passed by Hon'ble High Court, Nagpur Bench in a Writ Petition
which was partly allowed. The next date of hearing is to be intimated.

2 A consumer complaint under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, has been filed by the Company (Consumer
Case No. 87/2021) against United India Insurance Company Limited before National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission (NCDRC) praying for compensation in relation to damage of Generator of Unit 5. Matter has been admitted
and notice has been issued to Respondent. The next date of hearing in the matter is 10 June 2025.

3 A consumer complaint under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, has been filed by the Company (Consumer
Case no. 2/2022) against Tata AIG Insurance Co. before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC)
praying for compensation in relation to damage of Generator of Unit 2. Matter has been admitted and notice has been
issued to Respondent. The next date of hearing in the matter is 16 May 2025.

4 A consumer complaint under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, has been filed by the Company (Consumer
Case No. 2236/2018) against United India Insurance Company Limited (UIICL) before National Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission (NCDRC) praying for UIICL to be held deficient in providing services to the Company, (ii) the
repudiation of the claim under Large Risk Insurance Policy No. 500300/11/14/06/00000170 is without any basis and is
invalid and (iii) the claim amount of ' 6.09 crore along with Interest. The next date of hearing in the matter is 15
August 2025.

The Company is involved in various legal proceedings and other regulatory matters relating to conduct of its business.
In respect of such claims, the Company believes that these claims do not constitute material litigation matters and
with its meritorious defences, the ultimate disposition in these matters will not have material adverse effect on these
standalone financial statements.

E Others

The Company has provided commitment bank guarantees of ' 249.43 crore (31 March 2024 : ' 248.79 crore) which are
secured by pledge on its fixed deposits of ' 124.63 crore (31 March 2024 : ' 124.42 crore) as margin for issuance of bank
guarantees.

33 The Water Resource Department of the Government of Maharashtra ('WRD' or "Respondent') vide their letter dated 29
January 2013 had raised a demand of ' 232.18 crore on the Company for payment of irrigation restoration charges (IRC) at
the rate of ' 0.01 crore per hectare as per Government Resolution (GR) dated 6 March 2009, which was contrary to the
Water Resources Department, Government of Maharashtra's circular dated 21 February 2004 that stated the rate to be '
0.005 crore per hectare. The Company had paid ' 116.57 crore (calculated at ' 0.005 crore per hectare) and had filed a Writ
Petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court on 13 February 2013, challenging the validity of demand so raised by WRD.
The Mumbai bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide its order dated 3 August 2015 transferred the matter to Nagpur
Bench. The Nagpur Bench vide its order dated 5 May 2016 had partly allowed the petition and held that demand at revised
rate i.e. as per GR dated 6 March 2009 was illegal and unsustainable. As per Nagpur Bench order, the rate prescribed in the
GR dated 6 March 2009 was applicable prospectively from 1 April 2009 and was not applicable in Company's case since the
water allocation had already been finalized on 12 December 2007.

Pursuant to above order, Maharashtra State Government had filed a Special Leave Petition ("SLP") before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India (SC). The Hon'ble SC vide its order dated 13 January 2023 set aside the order of Bombay High Court
holding that the Company is liable to pay IRC at rate of ' 0.01 crore/hectare. Aggrieved of the SC order, the Company had
filed a review petition before the SC bench on 12 February 2023, that was dismissed by the Hon'ble SC vide order dated 10
August 2023.

Consequently, during the year, the management had assessed and accounted for the financial impact of the aforesaid
matter in the standalone financial statements, as per applicable Indian Accounting Standards and believes no further
adjustment is necessary.

34 Estimated amount of contracts remaining to be executed on account of capital and other commitments towards the project
not provided for: ' 225.92 crore (31 March 2024: ' 174.87 crore) - advances made there against ' 1.67 crore (31 March
2024: ' 3.09 crore).

35 (i) The Code on Social Security, 2020 ('Code') has been notified in the Official Gazette of India on 29 September 2020,

which could impact the contributions of the Company towards certain employment benefits. Effective date from
which changes are applicable is yet to be notified and the rules are yet be framed. Impact, if any, of change will be
assessed and accounted for in the period of notification of relevant provisions.

(ii) In respect of amounts as mentioned under Section 125 of the Companies Act, 2013, there were no dues required to be
credited to the Investor Education and Protection Fund as at 31 March 2025 and 31 March 2024.

36 Revenue from operations on account of Change in Law events and Interest Income thereon in terms of Power Purchase
Agreement ("PPA") is accounted for by the Company based on the best estimates, management's interpretation of the
regulatory orders and various technical parameters, which may be subject to necessary adjustments, on account of final
acknowledgement/ orders/ settlement by the respective authorities.

37 Employee benefits
Defined contribution:

Contributions are made to the Government Provident Fund and Family Pension Fund which cover all regular employees
eligible under applicable Acts. Both the eligible employees and the Company make pre-determined contributions to the
Provident Fund. The contributions are normally based upon a proportion of the employee's salary. The Company has
recognized in the statement of profit and loss an amount of ' 0.83 crore (31 March 2024: ' 0.80 crore) towards employer's
contribution towards Provident Fund.

1. Defined benefits:

Gratuity scheme - This is an unfunded defined benefit plan and it entitles an employee, who has rendered at least 5 years
of continuous service, to receive one-half month's salary for each year of completed service at the time of retirement/exit/
death as below.

i) On normal retirement / early retirement / withdrawal / resignation: As per the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity
Act, 1972 with vesting period of 5 years of service.

ii) On death in service: As per the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 without any vesting period. Gratuity
payable to employee in case (i) and (ii), as mentioned above, is computed as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972
except that the Company does not have any limit on gratuity amount.

Investment in subsidiaries are measured at cost as per Ind AS 27, 'Separate financial statements' and hence, not
presented here.

ii) Risk management

The Company's risk management activities are subject to the management direction and control under the framework
of Risk Management Policy as approved by the Board of Directors of the Company. The management ensures appropriate
risk governance framework for the Company through appropriate policies and procedures and the risks are identified,
measured and managed in accordance with the Company's policies and risk objectives.

The Company is exposed to various risks in relation to financial instruments. The Company's financial assets and
liabilities by category are summarised in note 40(i). The Company's financial liabilities (other than derivatives) comprises
mainly of borrowings including interest accrual, leases, trade, capital and other payables. The Company's financial
assets (other than derivatives) comprise mainly of investments, cash and cash equivalents, other balances with banks,
loans, trade and other receivables.

A) Credit risk

Credit risk is the risk that a counterparty fails to discharge an obligation to the Company. Credit risk arises from cash
and cash equivalents, trade receivables, investments carried at amortised cost and deposits with banks and financial
institutions. The Company's maximum exposure to credit risk is limited to the carrying amount of financial assets
recognised at 31 March 2025 and 31 March 2024, as summarised below:

The Company continuously monitors defaults of customers and other counterparties, and incorporates this information
into its credit risk controls. The Company's policy is to deal only with creditworthy counterparties.

The Company's management considers that all of the above financial assets are not impaired and/ or past due for each
of the above assets reporting dates under review are of good credit quality.

The Company considers the probability of default upon initial recognition of asset and whether there has been a
significant increase in credit risk on an on-going basis throughout each reporting period. In general, it is presumed that
credit risk has significantly increased since initial recognition if the payments are more than 30 days past due. A
default on a financial asset is when the counterparty fails to make contractual payments when they fall due. This
definition of default is determined by considering the business environment in which entity operates and other macro¬
economic factors.

(i) The Company's management considers assets other than trade receivables, which are 30 days past due and
analyses facts and circumstances surrounding each such defaults separately. If the facts indicate a probability of
loss of value, the asset's then expected cash flows are plotted in present value based impairment model to
determine the amount of impairment loss. Amounts are written off only in the following circumstances: a) no
probable legal recourse is available for recovery, b) the counterparty is bankrupt, c) the cost of recovery is more
than the amount or d) after all possible efforts the Company is unable to recover amounts after a period of 3
years.

Similarly, substantial part of Company's financial assets, other than trade receivables are recoverable from
Company's subsidiary, which the management of the Company believes are not credit impaired and there are no
12 month expected credit losses that are required to be recognised, other than those already assessed and
recorded.

(ii) The Company has no such assets where credit losses have been recognised as none of the assets are credit
impaired. The Company's trade receivables are only with a single, government owned counter party and to be
recovered under the power purchase agreement and also have interest clause on delayed payments. Therefore,
these trade receivables are considered high quality and accordingly no life time expected credit losses are
recognised on such receivables based on simplified approach.

(iii) The credit risk for cash and cash equivalents and other bank balances is considered negligible, since the
counterparties are reputable banks with high quality external credit ratings.

B) Liquidity risk

Prudent liquidity risk management implies maintaining sufficient cash and marketable securities and the availability
of funding through an adequate amount of committed credit facilities to meet obligations when due. Due to the
nature of the business, the Company maintains flexibility in funding by maintaining availability under committed
facilities.

Management monitors rolling forecasts of the Company's liquidity position and cash and cash equivalents on the basis
of expected cash flows. The Company takes into account the liquidity of the market in which the entity operates.

b) Interest rate risk
Liabilities/assets

The Company's policy is to minimise interest rate cash flow risk exposures on long-term financing. At 31 March
2025 and 31 March 2024, the Company is not exposed to changes in market interest rates through borrowings at
variable interest rates. The Company's fixed deposits are carried at amortised cost and are fixed rate deposits.
They are therefore not subject to interest rate risk as defined in Ind AS 107, since neither the carrying amount nor
the future cash flows will fluctuate because of a change in market interest rates.

50 The operations of the Company fall under the "Power generation and allied activities" business, which is considered to be
the only reportable segment in accordance with the provisions of Ind AS 108 - Operating Segments. Further the Company
derives revenue from a single external customer and currently the Company operations are domiciled in India and therefore,
there is no reportable geographical segment.

51 Leases disclosure

The Company has entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with MSEDCL (Lessee) for the supply of electricity for a term
of 25 years, which has been considered as an embedded lease arrangement for the Company's power plant. Such lease is
classified as operating lease, and as such the revenue is recognized on straight line basis. Considering that the capacity
charges per unit is higher in the initial years, there is a negative impact to P&L on account of straight lining. Accordingly,
capacity charges charged by the Company are treated as lease rentals. The minimum lease payments under non-cancellable
operating leases to be charged by the Company are as follows:

The Company has elected not to recognise a lease liability for short term leases (leases of expected term of 12 months or
less) or for leases of low value assets. Payments made under such leases are expensed on a straight-line basis. In addition,
certain variable lease payments are not permitted to be recognised as lease liabilities and are expensed as incurred.

52 During the previous year, the Company's overseas subsidiary company- Bracond Limited and step- down subsidiary
companies- Geneformus Limited and Renemark Limited, had been dissolved effective 27 March 2024, as certified by
Department of Insolvency, Ministry of Energy, Commerce and Industry, Cyprus. Accordingly, during the current year, same
was taken on record by Competent Authority and the UIN allotted to the Bracond Limited was cancelled.

53 In light of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No 5399-5400 of 2016 in the matter of Energy
Watchdog vs CERC vide judgment dated 11 April 2017 followed by judgment dated 13 November 2020 of Appellate Tribunal
for Electricity (APTEL) and order dated 16 November 2021 of MERC, RPL has recomputed its Change in Law claims and has
raised supplementary invoice on MSEDCL, as directed by MERC. Subsequently, vide interim Order dated 14 February 2022,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed MSEDCL to pay 50% of the outstanding claim amount till the time the matter attains
finality. Further, on 27 March 2023, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal 1805/2021 filed by MSEDCL.
Accordingly, MSEDCL has paid ' 876.84 crore till date and is in the process of making the balance payment, in compliance
with the aforesaid order. Hence, it would not be unreasonable to expect the realization of the amount of compensation
along with interest recorded in the books of account, in relation to the aforesaid developments.

55 The Company held non-current investment of ' 1,211.82 crore (net of impairment provision of ' 1,814.40 crore) and loans
under 'current financial assets' of ' 33.32 crore (net of impairment provision of ' 43.34 crore) recoverable from Sinnar
Thermal Power Limited ('STPL'), an erstwhile wholly-owned subsidiary company upto 18 January 2024. During the previous
year, the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi ('NCLT') vide Order dated 19 January 2024, had dismissed STPL's
appeal, and had reinitiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Code, 2016 ('IBC'). Consequently, the powers of the Board of Directors of STPL were suspended and the management of
STPL vested with the Resolution Professional ('RP') appointed under the provisions of IBC and accordingly, STPL has ceased
to be a subsidiary of the Company with effect from 19 January 2024.

In view of uncertainties associated with the outcome of CIRP and as a matter of prudence, during the year ended 31 March
2024, the Company had recorded full impairment of its investment (Gross investment amount: ' 3,026.22 crore; impairment
provision already recorded in earlier years: ' 1,814.40 crore; Balance impairment recorded during the previous year: '
1,211.82 crore) in and write off of loans extended to STPL (Gross amount of loans extended: ' 81.81 crore; impairment
provision already recorded in earlier years: ' 48.49 crore; balance loss recorded during the previous year: ' 33.32 crore),
resulting in accounting for aggregate impairment/ write off expense of ' 1,245.14 crore during the previous year ended 31
March 2024, that had been presented as an exceptional item in the standalone financial statements.

57 Other statutory information

(i) The Company did not have any Benami property and no proceedings have been initiated or pending against the Company
and its Indian subsidiaries for holding any Benami property, under the Benami Transactions (Prohibitions) Act, 1988
(45 of 1988) and the Rules made thereunder.

(ii) The Company did not have any transactions with struck off companies under section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013
or section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956 .

(iii) The Company did not have any charges or satisfaction which is yet to be registered with Registrar of Companies
beyond the statutory period.

(iv) The Company has not traded or invested in Crypto currency or Virtual Currency during the year.

(v) The Company has not advanced or loaned or invested funds to any other person(s) or entity(ies), including foreign
entities (Intermediaries) with the understanding that the Intermediary shall:

a. directly or indirectly lend or invest in other persons or entities identified in any manner whatsoever by or on
behalf of the company (Ultimate Beneficiaries) or

b. provide any guarantee, security or the like to or on behalf of the Ultimate Beneficiaries

(vi) The Company has not received any fund from any person(s) or entity(ies), including foreign entities (Funding Party)
with the understanding (whether recorded in writing or otherwise) that the Company shall:

a. directly or indirectly lend or invest in other persons or entities identified in any manner whatsoever by or on
behalf of the Funding Party (Ultimate Beneficiaries) or

b. provide any guarantee, security or the like on behalf of the Ultimate Beneficiaries,

(vii) The Company has not any such transaction which is not recorded in the books of accounts that has been surrendered
or disclosed as income during the year in the tax assessments under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (such as, search or
survey or any other relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

(viii) The Company has not been declared as a 'Wilful Defaulter' by any bank or financial institution (as defined under the
Companies Act, 2013) or consortium thereof, in accordance with the guidelines on wilful defaulters issued by the
Reserve Bank of India

(ix) The Company complies with the number of layers prescribed under clause (87) of section 2 of the Act read with
Companies (Restriction on Number of Layers) Rules 2017.

58 The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has prescribed a new requirement for companies under the proviso to Rule 3(1) of
the Companies (Accounts) Rules, 2014 inserted by the Companies (Accounts) Amendment Rules 2021 requiring companies,
which uses accounting software for maintaining its books of account, shall use only such accounting software which has a
feature of recording audit trail of each and every transaction, creating an edit log of each change made in the books of
account along with the date when such changes were made and ensuring that the audit trail cannot be disabled.

The Company has used accounting software for maintaining its books of account which has a feature of recording audit trail
(edit log) facility and the same has operated throughout the year for all relevant transactions recorded in the software,
except that audit trail (edit log) was not enabled for direct changes to the underlying database. Further, no instance of audit
trail feature being tampered with was noted in respect of the software and except for the instance above, the audit trail has
been preserved by the Company as per the statutory requirements for record retention.

59 The Company evaluates events and transactions that occur subsequent to the balance sheet date, there were no significant
adjusting events that occurred other than those disclosed/given effect to in these standalone financials statements.

For Walker Chandiok & Co LLP For and on behalf of the Board of Directors

Chartered Accountants

Firm Registration No.: 001076N/ N500013

Deepak Mittal Rajiv Rattan Himanshu Mathur

Partner Executive Chairman Whole Time Director

Membership No. : 503843 DIN: 00010849 DIN: 03077198

Place: New Delhi Place: New Delhi Place: New Delhi

Date: 07 May 2025 Date: 07 May 2025 Date: 07 May 2025

Manish Ratnakar Chitnis Lalit Narayan Mathpati

Chief Financial Officer Company Secretary

PAN: AAKPC6703C FCS - 7943

Place: Mumbai Place: New Delhi

Date: 07 May 2025 Date: 07 May 2025