Upcoming IPO: Karamtara Engineering gets SEBI nod to raise funds through IPO
Upcoming IPO: Karamtara Engineering Limited, which submitted its Draft Red Herring Prospectus (DRHP) in January 2025, has today received final observations from SEBI to proceed with its IPO fundraising. The company presented its IPO paperwork to SEBI on January 23, 2025.
As a backward integrated producer of transmission line and renewable energy products, Karamtara Engineering stands out. According to the F&S Report, it holds the position as the top manufacturer of solar mounting structures and tracker components in India based on installed capacity for Fiscal 2024 and for the six months ending September 30, 2024.
Given their extensive product range, Karamtara Engineering has the potential to serve as a single-source provider for solar structures, encompassing both trackers and fixed-tilt systems. The company's offerings include structures for the transmission sector (such as lattice towers for transmission lines) alongside the solar energy sector (like solar module mounting structures, solar tracker piles and piers, and solar torque tubes).
In addition, it manufactures OHTL hardware fittings and accessories (including insulator string fittings, jumper tubes, suspension clamps, and vibration dampers) as well as fasteners (such as bolts, nuts, studs, and washers).
The total size of the offer consists of a new equity shares issue valued at ₹ 1,350 crore, in addition to an offer for sale by Selling Shareholders amounting to ₹ 400 crore. The Company intends to utilize the net proceeds from the new issue primarily for funding initiatives.
Specifically, ₹ 1,050 crore will be set aside for the prepayment, repayment, or settlement of obligations owed to lenders related to borrowings. The remaining funds will be allocated for general corporate purposes.
Prominent investors such as Jagdish Naresh Master, Utpal Hemendra Sheth, Singularity Growth Opportunities Fund, Gaurav Trehan, Quantum State Investment Fund, Ananta Capital Venture Fund, Jaidev Rajnikant Shroff, Axia Select Opportunities Fund, Mithun Padam Sacheti, and Siddhartha Sacheti, along with MNI Ventures, have invested in the firm through preferential allotment, as stated in the DRHP.
Disclaimer: The views and recommendations made above are those of individual analysts or broking companies, and not of Mint. We advise investors to check with certified experts before making any investment decisions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Sebi engages with venture capital funds directly to smoothen transition to AIF
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has extended a crucial deadline for older venture capital funds (VCFs) to wind up expired schemes, following direct engagement with the industry to smooth their transition to a new regulatory framework. The Sebi granted a one-year extension for liquidations, but maintained a firm stance on migration, requiring funds to apply to the Alternative Investment Fund (AIF) framework by 19 July 2025. People aware of the matter told Mint that Sebi's outreach—both independently and through industry associations such as the Indian Venture and Alternate Capital Association (IVCA) and the Private Equity and Venture Capital Chief Financial Officer Association (PEVCCFO)—helped clarify longstanding challenges and led to the extension for VCFs to wind up expired schemes. Sebi's engagement came amid concerns over a tepid response to its 2024 circular offering VCFs an opportunity to migrate under specified conditions. Many VCFs, some of which still operate despite the expiry of their scheme lifespans, have yet to begin the transition. Also read: IndusInd board says it didn't know. Sebi thinks it did. Now what? Through IVCA and directly, the regulator reached out to VCFs to find out why they are not doing the migration," said Rahul Shah, executive vice president at IVCA. He explained that in the meeting, IVCA's members clarified that they were trying to liquidate the balance investments and then apply for migration. 'They also wanted to see if they can liquidate and wind up the VCF, instead of undertaking the process of migration," Shah said. The VCF structure, governed by Sebi's 1996 regulations, was designed to promote early-stage and unlisted startups. However, with the rollout of the AIF Regulations in 2012, which offer broader coverage for private investment vehicles, Sebi has been steering the industry toward a single, modernized regime. Under the new framework, VCFs fall into Category I AIFs, alongside SME, social venture, and infrastructure funds. In its July 2024 circular, Sebi allowed eligible VCFs with unexpired or unwound schemes holding residual investments to migrate as 'Migrated VCFs". Those unwilling to migrate may continue operating under the old rules until their schemes close, or surrender registration if all activities are complete. However, industry feedback revealed outdated contact records and confusion around the regulatory shift. To address these issues, Sebi enlisted IVCA and PEVCCFO to help communicate the changes. Also read: Sebi to roll out new F&O risk measures in phases Sebi was told by the associations that even after migration, the liquidation of assets is still to be undertaken by funds, which has its own set of issues. 'The extension helps buy critical time to clean up without compromising on governance. For one, a rushed transition could have adverse effects on fund performance and investor returns," said Shruthi Cauvery, founder and managing partner of VAIA, a firm advising VCFs. She noted that fund managers and family offices were still grappling with the AIF regime's reporting and compliance requirements. 'There is some concern that this extension might lead to prolonged uncertainty, and I think that might lead to extended delays as well unless strict timelines are imposed." Shah emphasized that some VCFs continued operating well past their permitted tenure. 'Sebi overlooked then. But now you have time till July 19, 2025 (to migrate) without any penalty. If there are VCFs who will continue operating without the migration process, Sebi may not look at it nicely," he said. He added that Sebi is open to supporting compliant funds: 'If you first migrate and take your problem to Sebi, it will hear you." Not everyone in the industry supports a blanket migration approach. A VCF manager, speaking on condition of anonymity, questioned its necessity in certain cases. 'If they have a single investor, or if the promoter is missing, liquidation will be difficult. Why to migrate then?" the manager asked. Also read: Sebi's co-investment plan wins fund favour; lawyers warn of tax, legal cracks Still, most agree the move reflects Sebi's intent to bring all pooled investment vehicles under a unified regulatory framework. 'VCFs were born under a different regulatory mindset and AIFs represent the evolved, principles-based framework Sebi wants to standardize for all pooled investment vehicles going forward," said another fund manager, also speaking anonymously. Only VCFs with clean records and no pending investor complaints can opt for migration, Sebi has clarified. 'Sebi's extension of the additional liquidation period gives VCFs more room to transition into the AIF regime without triggering regulatory action. However, this opportunity is reserved for clean and compliant funds—those free from unresolved investor complaints or governance issues," said Venkatesh Chitla, client relationship manager at SBI-SG Global Securities Services Pvt. Ltd. Common disqualifiers, he added, include onboarding ineligible investors, incomplete know your customer (KYC) or anti-money laundering checks, side letters offering preferential terms, or breaches of investment conditions. 'For legacy funds nearing maturity or inactive, the compliance burden may outweigh the benefits of migration, leading to some consolidation in the space. But for institutional fund houses aiming to align with global best practices and continue raising capital, this is a strategic chance to clean up structures and reposition under a modern regulatory regime," Chitla said. Legal professionals also welcomed Sebi's move. 'The certainty that the recent extension circular provides particularly for funds in the process of seeking migration or awaiting Sebi's approval cannot be overstated," said Anita Jain, partner at IC Universal Legal. She noted that the extension gives managers sufficient time to plan asset liquidation in an orderly and investor-friendly manner. 'Without this extension, VCFs that had already migrated but whose liquidation period had expired prior to migration, were under pressure to make immediate decisions either to exit all underlying investments or undertake in-specie transfers and file for winding-up by July 19, 2025, or to finalize the dissolution plan with investors and file the dissolution plan application with Sebi within the same timeframe," Jain explained. 'The additional year offers much-needed flexibility, enabling fund managers to take well-considered, strategic decisions in the best interest of investors," she added. Even as the extended liquidation period is seen as a relief, Sebi has made its message clear: the VCF regime is being phased out. Only those willing to align with the AIF framework will be able to continue operations post-migration.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Meesho turns public company ahead of $1 billion IPO
Bengaluru: Ecommerce marketplace Meesho formally transitioned into a public limited company, according to recent filings with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. The move came as the Bengaluru-based firm advanced its plan to shift legal domicile from the US to India and restructure operations under a single onshore entity. Meesho is preparing for a potential $1 billion IPO. The company, incorporated as Fashnear Technologies, received board approval to rename itself Meesho Limited. It also passed a resolution to issue bonus shares worth Rs 411 crore at a 47:1 ratio, increasing paid-up share capital from Rs 8.7 crore to over Rs 420 crore. The bonus issue is a standard pre-IPO step aimed at aligning the capital structure for public listing requirements. Meesho reportedly appointed Kotak Mahindra Capital, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, and Citi as lead bankers for the IPO, which is expected to value the company at around $7-10 billion depending on market conditions. The listing is likely to take place in late 2025, subject to regulatory clearances. Founded in 2015 by Vidit Aatrey and Sanjeev Barnwal, Meesho built its business by targeting price-sensitive consumers in India's Tier II and Tier III cities. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Good News: You May Be Richer Than You Think It operates as a zero-commission marketplace for sellers and has differentiated itself from larger players like Amazon and Flipkart through its low-cost structure and mass-market reach. Meesho also launched its inhouse logistics arm, Valmo, last year to bring down delivery costs and increase control over fulfilment. The move to become a public entity follows a broader trend of startups converting into Indian domiciled public companies to comply with Sebi regulations and simplify investor structures ahead of domestic listings. A draft red herring prospectus (DRHP) filing is expected in the coming quarters.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 hours ago
- Business Standard
China's chokehold on this obscure mineral threatens the west's militaries
China's strict controls on the export of heat-resistant magnets made with rare earth minerals have exposed a major vulnerability in the U.S. military supply chain. Without these magnets, the United States and its allies in Europe will struggle to refill recently depleted inventories of military hardware. For more than a decade, the United States has failed to develop an alternative to China's supply of a specific kind of rare earth crucial for the manufacture of magnets for missiles, fighter jets, smart bombs and a lot of other military gear. Rare earth minerals are a central issue in the trade talks between the United States and China now underway in London. China produces the entire world's supply of samarium, a particularly obscure rare earth metal used almost entirely in military applications. Samarium magnets can withstand temperatures hot enough to melt lead without losing their magnetic force. They are essential for withstanding the heat of fast-moving electric motors in cramped spaces like the nose cones of missiles. On April 4, China halted exports of seven kinds of rare earth metals, as well as magnets made from them. China controls most of the world's supply of these metals and magnets. China's Ministry of Commerce declared that these materials had both civilian and military uses, and any further exports would be allowed only with specially issued licenses. The move, according to the ministry, would 'safeguard national security' and 'fulfill international obligations such as nonproliferation.' The ministry has begun issuing some licenses for magnets that include two of the restricted rare earths, dysprosium and terbium, to automakers in Europe and the United States. Magnets with these two rare earths, which are used in brake and steering systems, can withstand the heat of a nearby gasoline engine but cannot reliably tolerate the greater heat encountered in military applications. But there has been no sign that China has approved exports of samarium, which has few civilian applications. Chinese and American officials began on Monday two days of trade talks in London. Restoring the flow of rare earths is a priority for U.S. officials, but few expect China to rescind its new export license system entirely. 'I don't think that's going away,' said Michael Hart, the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, who is coordinating the U.S. private sector's efforts in Beijing to obtain more rare earth materials. The main American user of samarium is Lockheed Martin, an aerospace and military contractor that puts about 50 pounds of samarium magnets in each F-35 fighter jet. Lockheed Martin responded to questions with a short statement: 'We continuously assess the global rare earth supply chain to ensure access to critical materials that support our customers' missions. Specific questions about the rare earth supply chain will be best addressed by the U.S. government.' Officials in the Biden administration were so concerned about the U.S. military's lack of a domestic samarium supply that they issued large contracts for the construction of two samarium production facilities. Neither was built because of commercial concerns, leaving the United States entirely dependent on China. The interruption in samarium supplies over the past two months comes as the United States and its allies in Europe are rushing to rebuild inventories of advanced weaponry. These stocks have been severely depleted by shipments to Ukraine after the Russian invasion and, for the United States, to Israel during the Gaza conflict. The Trump administration is also trying to supply more weapons to Taiwan, an island democracy over which Beijing claims sovereignty. In addition to halting exports of rare earths for military use, China recently imposed sanctions on some American military contractors because of their roles supplying Taiwan. Those sanctions now bar Chinese companies and individuals from having any financial connection to the U.S. military contractors. That did not have much of an effect on the samarium industry until recently, because China exported samarium to chemical companies that mixed the metal with cobalt before selling it to magnet manufacturers, which then sell to the military contractors. But Beijing's new export controls on rare earths specify that licenses can be issued based only on the final user of the mineral at the end of the supply chain. For samarium licenses, that sometimes means military contractors. Of the seven kinds of rare earth metals restricted by China, the demand for six of them is largely civilian, said Stanley Trout, a metallurgist at the Metropolitan State University of Denver who has specialized in samarium magnets since the 1970s. Samarium is different. It is 'almost exclusively used for military purposes,' he said. U.S. Defense Department regulations require that the casting or smelting of military magnets be done in the United States or a friendly nation. But the rules allow the ingredients of military magnets to be imported from anywhere, so low-cost samarium has come from China for many years, Mr. Trout said. Concerns about dependence on China for samarium are not new. Starting in the 1970s, militaries in the West depended on a single chemical factory in La Rochelle, France, that refined samarium from ore mined in Australia. But that factory closed in 1994, partly because of pollution concerns. The factory also could not compete with inexpensive production in Baotou, a city in China's Inner Mongolia region with a history of weak environmental enforcement, even by China's standards. In 2009, U.S. lawmakers became worried about American dependence on samarium supplies from refineries in Baotou, a flat, dry industrial city at the southern edge of the Gobi Desert. Congress ordered the Defense Department to come up with a plan by the next year to address the issue. That was before China halted shipments to Japan of all 17 kinds of rare earths for two months in late 2010 as part of a territorial dispute. A $1 billion American effort began soon after to repair, expand and reopen the sole U.S. rare earths mine, in Mountain Pass, Calif., which had suspended operations in 1998 after a pipeline leak. Rare earth metals are found all over the world, but seldom in concentrations high enough for efficient mining. They are tightly bound together, and breaking those chemical bonds can require a sequence of 100 or more chemical processes using extremely powerful acids. The Mountain Pass mine had not previously tried to pry samarium loose from its ore, and did not start doing so as part of its expansion. The mine reopened in 2014, producing other rare earths, but closed a year later and went bankrupt because it could not compete with Chinese production. Jay Truesdale, a former American diplomat who played a senior role at the State Department on critical minerals policy in 2014 and 2015, said the Obama administration had focused on using World Trade Organization rules to compel China to sell its rare earths. 'There was less of an alarmist perspective at that time, because the W.T.O. was seen as the right and proper arbiter of these issues,' said Mr. Truesdale, who is now chief executive of TD International, a Washington consulting firm. During his first term, President Trump considerably reduced U.S. participation in the W.T.O., and relations with China worsened. When the Biden administration took office, senior officials became more concerned about samarium. A new company, MP Materials, had acquired the Mountain Pass mine and resumed operations there in 2018. But it initially shipped ore to China for processing. The Defense Department awarded $35 million to MP in early 2022 to start production of samarium and several other rare earths that China has now restricted. MP then spent $100 million, using a lot of its own money, to buy the necessary equipment to process them, said James Litinsky, the company's chief executive. The Biden administration soon after awarded $351 million to Australia's Lynas Rare Earths to build a facility in Texas that would also produce samarium. Mr. Litinsky said the market for samarium was so small that it would be uneconomical to have two producers in the United States. So MP never installed its samarium processing equipment, which is still in storage. But Lynas never built its Texas factory, after a permit it had for rare earth mining in Malaysia that was in limbo was eventually renewed. Lynas did not respond to emails and phone calls for comment. MP is willing to install its samarium processing equipment now only if promised better financial terms by customers, Mr. Litinsky noted. 'We felt very burnt by the whole thing,' he said.
