Thank you, Michelle, and a very warm welcome to all participants. Joining me today are my colleagues: Mr.

Vikas Poddar, CFO; Mr. Tejinder Kalra, COO; and Mr.

Dheeraj Agarwal, Head Investor Relations, on the call. Today, I will talk about our business performance for the quarter and year ending on March 31, 2026.

FY 2026 was marked by strong co-location additions and continued tower additions, reflects our strong execution capabilities, exceptional service to our customer, underpins our competitiveness strength to capture a meaningful share of customers' network expansion. Gradual improvement in the financials position of a major customer, aided by the government support, provides visibility of strong business momentum.

Overall, FY 2026 was another year of solid progress, with strong operational and financial performance. With the improved financial situation of one of the customers and the potential of business momentum, the board has recommended final dividend of ₹14 per share.

Before delving deeper into our business performance, I would like to acknowledge the exceptional commitment of our field force, whose ability to overcome geographic and climactic challenges enables consistent delivery of reliable, round-the-clock connectivity nationwide. During the quarter, Assam and parts of Northeast experienced severe weather conditions, which significantly disrupted the movement of our on-ground workforce.

Despite these challenges, our field teams acted swiftly to restore services, stabilizing connectivity and effectively preventing any major disruption. On the regulatory front, the Ministry of Finance introduced incentive-linked schemes to encourage states to align with the RoW rules 2024.

With an allocation of ₹4,000 crores to states, the scheme is expected to accelerate approvals and ease deployment bottlenecks. The green energy open access policy has now been operationalized across all states, reinforcing the sector's transition towards cleaner and more sustainable energy sources.

This is expected to help reduce the energy costs for tower companies. Additionally, Central Electricity Authority, i.e.

CEA, has modified the Installation and Operation of Meters Regulations 2026, mandating smart meters for all customers in areas with communication networks. In this context, we are actively collaborating with stakeholders at both central and state levels to deploy smart meters across our cities, which will enhance operational efficiency, optimize energy costs, and enable more granular scalable billing mechanisms.

Moving up to update on 5G networks, the installed base of 5G BTSs now stands at close to 531,000. As large-scale deployment stabilize, rising data demand and network densification are giving the need for incremental capacity on existing infrastructure, supporting sustained loading-led revenue growth.

Over time, this is also expected to be complemented by selective expansion of the tower footprint. Backed by strong customer relationships and a robust operating platform, Indus Towers is well placed to capitalize on these opportunities and support the evolving requirements of next-generation networks.

As per the latest TRAI report, the total 5G subscription base in India stood at over 391 million by the end of December 2025, growing by 30 million in Q3 FY 2026. India's data consumption momentum remains robust, driven by the continued migration of users towards 4G and 5G.

As per TRAI's latest publication, total data consumption and average monthly data usage per user grew by 29% and 21% year-on-year, respectively. According to TRAI, 5G usage alone grew 21% quarter-on-quarter, accounting for 40% of the total data traffic in Q3 FY 2026, up from 35% in Q2 FY 2026.

Continued growth in data usage is encouraging operators to enhance capacity across existing infrastructure. With a pan-India presence, with expansive tower portfolio, and a strong execution track record, Indus Towers remains well positioned to partner with customers in meeting their evolving network requirements.

In terms of operational performance, we registered strong co-location additions during the quarter, driven by pick-up by the customers' network expansion and our ability to capture a major share of the customers' rollouts. We added 4,892 macro towers and 6,192 corresponding co-locations during the quarter, translating into a year-on-year growth of 6.1% and 5.6% in tower and co-location base, respectively.

As a result, total macro tower and co-locations stood at around 264,500 and 428,000, respectively. On a full-year basis, tower and co-location additions were around 15,200 and 22,500, respectively.

Our industry-leading tenancy ratio was stable at 1.62. Our co-locations of leaner towers stood at more than 14,000.

Including leaner towers, our portfolio stood at approximately 442,000 at the end of the year. I will now provide an update on our key KPIs.

We remain committed to reducing diesel consumption by transitioning to cleaner sources of energy. We added closer to 2,500 sites with solar access during the quarter, taking the overall sites to about 42,400.

Diesel consumption on our sites reduced by about 7% year-on-year in Q4 FY 2026. This is despite 6% year-on-year increase in co-locations and continued equipment loading on the sites.

Navigating extreme weather conditions, the dedication and perseverance of our teams on the ground helped us deliver an industry-best uptime of 99.977% in Q4 FY 2026. Let me now move to our strategic pillars: market share, cost efficiency, network uptime, and sustainability.

On market share, we continued to strengthen our position. We remain preferred partner for our key customers that enables us to capture a significant share of their network rollout.

Network expansion was robust across major customers, allowing us to improve our market share in new deployments. Our ability to deliver reliable service at competitive rates, supported by strong execution and stringent quality standards, has been central to this performance.

Targeted technical interventions and customized product offerings have further contributed to cost optimization and improvement in overall delivery. In our non-tower segment, we achieved leadership position in the IBS space in Q4.

Our DAS business also saw a pickup, with increased deployments in metros, tunnels, and highways. With a focus on build-to-suit solutions and continued technological advancement, this segment is well positioned for further growth.

Cost discipline and operational excellence are embedded in our ways of working, with a continued focus on improving efficiency, enhancing predictability, and structurally resetting our cost base. We made targeted interventions across tower strengthening, civil and electrical works, supply chain-led cost optimization, and partner scope rationalization, while ensuring site safety and service reliability.

Energy efficiency is a central driver of our cost reduction efforts. During the year, we scaled deployment of energy-efficient solutions, including broader solar integration and accelerated deployment of advanced battery technologies.

Over the last two years, as mentioned earlier, we have ramped up our solar deployment and provided solar access to about 28,000 sites during this period. We have also progressively increased the share of lithium-ion batteries across our portfolio.

These initiatives are structurally reducing diesel dependency, improving uptime, and supporting a more resilient and lower-cost energy framework. We also continue to strengthen our approach towards capex management by enhancing cost discipline, standardizing tower costs, and tightening execution controls across tower deployments.

Thirdly, service reliability remains a core priority, with continued focus on maintaining industry-leading standards across our operations. We are leveraging advanced digital tools and data platforms to enhance service delivery, by the way of enabling faster issue resolution, implementing a more proactive, data-driven approach to address customers' needs.

FY 2026 marked a major step-up in our digital and AI-led transformation. For example, over 85% of our sites are now digitally connected, covering key systems such as fuel sensors, backhaul monitoring, smart meters, and power equipment, among others.

The deployment of AI and machine learning capabilities have enabled proactive identification of outages, automated root-cause analysis, and improved resolution effectiveness. Initiatives such as AI-based voice agents for technician calling and computer vision-led validation of preventive maintenance activities have enhanced field productivity, standardization, and compliance, while delivering high levels of accuracy.

Energy management, as mentioned earlier, remains an important area to focus, with the implementation of an end-to-end automated fuel management platform enabling real-time planning of diesel usage, logistics optimization, and fill validation. These interventions are improving cost efficiency and operational control.

In parallel, we have progressed our digital twin journey through site surface image platform, enabling planning teams with a unified view of site to optimize asset utilization and improve civil and electrical planning. We are progressing well on our ESG agenda as well.

During the year, we undertook a double materiality assessment and a comprehensive climate risk assessment across our operations, enhancing our understanding of physical and transition risks and embedding resilience into long-term planning. Following the approval of our near-term and net-zero targets by Science Based Targets initiative, SBTi, we have formulated a decarbonization roadmap to guide progress towards these commitments.

On the workplace, gender diversity improved from 16.2% in FY 2025 to 18.3% in FY 2026. During the year, we launched our Digital Leap program to advance digital and AI capabilities across the organization.

We also launched Prerna, a women-led mentoring program to inspire and uplift women employees. We undertook campaigns and targeted trainings focused on road safety and technicians working at heights.

In CSR, as part of our flagship program Saksham, in association with the Bharti Airtel Foundation, we have supported over 30 Satya Bharti Schools and 1,100 government schools across multiple states and Union Territories under the Quality Support Program. Additionally, our digital transformation van has touched over 646,000 lives in FY 2026.

As part of our other flagship program Pragati, we conducted disaster relief measures across the nation, positively impacting close to 3,000 households. Through these programs, we managed to touch around 33 million lives by end of FY 2026.

On the governance front, we maintain high levels of governance, integrity, and transparency. To drive ESG adoption across our value chain, we instituted the ESG Pathfinder Awards, with the objective of recognizing who have demonstrated meaningful commitment towards advancing sustainability initiatives.

Our CSR efforts throughout the year were recognized by multiple bodies, as the company was awarded the Mahatma Award for CSR Excellence and recognized for sustainable and responsible business, amongst the others. I will now provide a brief update on our progress on Africa expansion.

We are making steady progress on our Africa foray, with key operational and structural building blocks largely in place across our target markets. In Zambia, we have secured the operating license and are now advancing on-ground execution.

In Uganda and Nigeria, we are in the last stages of getting regulatory approvals. Commercial frameworks are largely established with the primary customer, and initial orders are in place.

In parallel, we have made good progress in setting up supply chain ecosystem and strengthening operational readiness, positioning us well for efficient and scalable deployment. We expect the rollouts will begin soon and will ramp up progressively as approvals come through.

Overall, our strategy in Africa remains it's a long-term strategy and remains to create differentiation through better cost per tower, delivering better SLA, uptime, and higher energy efficiency. By doing this and remaining competitive commercially in line with the local market, we believe, in long-term, to be a major player in Africa tower business.

Geopolitical developments due to the war in West Asia have created near-term supply-side disruptions, impacting tower availability, deployment timelines, and cost structures, primarily through energy supply constraints and input cost inflation. We continue to monitor the situation closely, and mitigating actions are being taken in line with the evolving geopolitical and market conditions.

With regards to rewarding the shareholders, we are pleased to announce that the board has recommended a final dividend of ₹14 per share, reflecting our commitment towards returning cash to shareholders. As was informed earlier, the board considered and decided to resume shareholder payouts, while remaining aligned with our disciplined capital allocation approach and ongoing investment priorities.

The endeavor would be to follow a steady and progressive distribution. I would now request Vikas to take you through our financial performance for the quarter and year ending March 31, 2026, and I look forward to your questions.

Over to you, Vikas. Thank you.

Thank you, Prachur, and good afternoon, everyone. I'm pleased to present our financial results for the quarter and year ending 31st March 2026.

FY 2026 saw strong co-location additions, supported by continued customer network expansion. Sustained business momentum and positive developments at our customer's end underpinned our financial performance.

In terms of financial performance for quarter four, FY 2026, total revenues were at 81 billion, growing by 4.8% year-on-year. Core revenues from rentals stood at 53.1 billion, up 5.4% year-on-year, driven by healthy co-location additions.

Please note that quarter four of last year had one-time reconciliation benefits. I had explained in quarter four FY 2025 earnings call that the benefits added about 2.1 percentage point to the sequential growth in core revenues.

With regard to quarter four FY 2026, our reported gross revenues was 0.6% lower quarter-on-quarter, due to lower energy revenue, which is an outcome of both our cost optimization and seasonality-driven reduction in the energy cost. Core revenues increased by 0.6% quarter-on-quarter.

Impact of one-time settlement in quarter four and network optimization by our customers weighed on the overall growth in revenue. On profitability, reported EBITDA was at 44.6 billion, growing by 1.6% year-on-year and declining 1% quarter-on-quarter.

The EBITDA margin was lower by 1.8 percentage point year-on-year and 0.2 percentage point quarter-on-quarter, at 55.1% for quarter four FY 2026. I would like to remind you that quarter four FY 2025 included write-backs of approximately 2.3 billion related to collection of overdue receivables from a major customer.

Quarter four last year also included accounting impact of towers acquired from Airtel, amounting to ₹1.7 billion towards operating expenses and depreciation. Adjusted for the write-back and accounting impact, EBITDA was up 4.5% year-on-year.

The sequential decline in EBITDA was partially due to higher network costs, which increased primarily due to higher maintenance activities on our aging and growing tower portfolio. Our energy margins were at negative 3.6% in quarter four FY 2026, compared to negative 5.2% in the same period last year.

We continue to undertake cost optimization initiatives, particularly around energy management. This includes structural reduction in diesel dependence through increased adoption of renewable energy solutions, battery augmentation, and continued focus on our operation efficiencies.

These efforts are complemented by technology-led monitoring and disciplined execution, enabling a more predictable and efficient energy cost profile. Our profit after tax grew by 0.8% year-on-year and 0.9% quarter-on-quarter to ₹17.9 billion.

The moderate year-on-year growth is a result of higher base due to one-time reconciliation benefits in quarter four last year, as I had explained earlier. Now moving on to full-year performance for FY 2026, our reported gross revenues stood at ₹325 billion, growing by 7.9% year-on-year, while core revenues were up 9% year-on-year to ₹209 billion.

Reported EBITDA was ₹180 billion, down 13.8% year-on-year, and profit after tax stood at ₹71.4 billion, a decrease of 28.1% year-on-year. Kindly note that the FY 2025 included a substantial write-back of ₹51 billion relating to collection of overdue receivables from a major customer.

On a normalized basis, excluding one-offs, EBITDA and PAT grew by 11.4% and 13%, respectively. Our return ratios remained largely stable, with reported pre-tax return on capital employed and post-tax return on equity standing at 20.2% and 19.8%, respectively, on a trailing 12-month basis.

We had significant free cash flow generation of ₹11.1 billion in quarter four and ₹37.6 billion in full-year FY 2026. Subsequently, the board has recommended final dividend of ₹14 per share, reflecting improved visibility on cash flows and our commitment to reward shareholders.

To conclude, FY 2026 reflects strong financial performance, underpinned by healthy co-location additions and disciplined execution, and our ability to capture major share of rollouts by our key customers. Ongoing demand momentum and consistent collections, along with our focus on cost optimization and operational efficiencies, provide strong visibility into future cash generation.

With this, I will now hand it back to the moderator to open the floor for questions. Thank you.

Hi. Thanks for the opportunity, and congrats to the management for dividend distribution.

Starting from there, we have paid around 100% of this year's free cash flow, but how should we think about the additional free cash flow we had received or generated last year, which was on account of reversal of dues from VI? If I'm not mistaken, they were also supposed to be made available for distribution.

Secondly, I would like to understand more about the capex going forward. Understand the green capex company's making and higher maintenance required on the aging portfolio, but if you can have some guidance over the next couple of years, how should we think capex spend, as it directly impacts the free cash flow and dividends?

Sure. Maybe I'll answer the first part, then you can take up the capex one, Vikas.

See, the board evaluated the FCF situation and the debt levels that we want to maintain, and decided accordingly to distribute the FCF of FY 2026. As I mentioned, the endeavor will remain to follow steady and progressive distribution going forward.

That's the thinking behind the dividend. Maybe, Vikas, you can touch base on the capex.

Yeah. Thanks for the question, Rishabh.

I think on the capex, just to give you the big picture, and as we have also explained earlier, 70% of the capex that we spend is growth-oriented, which basically leads to growth in our revenue and the bottom line. Just about 25% is basically something that goes towards replacement, maintenance, and so on.

I think as long as there is growth and there is basically tower build order, etc., I think the capex will sort of be steered towards that. As far as the future guidance is concerned, I think we still have a very healthy order book.

While we don't give any sort of forward-looking numbers, but broadly speaking, I think we are sort of looking at a very good order book, and we continue to see growth-oriented capex going forward.

Just couple of follow-up on the free cash flow and the debt that you had mentioned. Ex lease liabilities, we are sitting on net cash, right?

Is there anything that the management is foreseeing on or on a major investment area, so that we want to maintain our debt levels? You have mentioned the order book remains healthy.

Does this order book include expansion in Africa as well, or is it just India? No,

I think what Vikas is referring is primarily to the order book of India. As I mentioned in my commentary, I think the Africa expansion is just starting.

It's a long-term strategy, the portion of capex for Africa is not going to be that significant in to start with. I think it's order book that he's referring to is primarily on the India side.

As far as that debt and FCF situation is concerned, I think keeping capital allocation in mind and all the growth opportunities coming up, that's where the board decision came to distribute the FCF for FY 2026.

Okay. I'll go back to the queue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, thank you for the opportunity. I have two questions.

First question, Vikas, I just wanted to clarify on the dividend policy. While Prachur did mention on steady and progressive distribution, is there a dividend policy, or is it more ad hoc, where every year the board will consider based on the cash flows and plan and give dividend?

If there is a dividend policy, then can you clarify what is the dividend policy?

Sure, Sachin. The dividend policy is, first of all, available on our website.

Broadly, what it says is the company and the board will consider distribution of the free cash flow of the company at the year end, subject to the working capital requirements of the company and subject to few other conditions. Based on that, even for this year, the free cash flow of the company, the financial results, etc., was presented, and the board decided to distribute the full cash generation of this year as dividend, which is what is reflected in the ₹14.

No minimum payout kind of an amount which is out there? Every year, the board will consider that?

That's right. That's right.

Got it. Second question, one of your major customer contract has expired, and from what we understand that customer has not renewed the contract.

Can you give some color and updates here, and if the customer decides not to renew contract, then what kind of impact could we see?

Sachin, first of all, I think we have contracts for each tower, right? I think there is no broad contract expiry.

I think there are certain tenancies which fall under that bucket. It's not the entire portfolio.

Secondly, I think if you look from our portfolio point of view over the last three, four years, we have built quite a bit of resiliency by deploying large-scale towers and co-locations. That portfolio is actually the expired portfolio is actually very small portion of the entire portfolio.

While we continue to work with the customer to see how we can continue to provide the stickiness by providing high levels of service, but over the last three, four years and continuously, what we are doing, we're trying to mitigate any such risk that is there, right? We'll keep monitoring the situation and keep growing the portfolio across other customers as well.

Got it. When I look at your tenancy ratio for last three, four years, it has come down and continues to come down.

Directionally, that's a trajectory we should think about going ahead as well, right?

I would not give you a outlook in that format, because see, last few years was determined by deploying towers for one major customer. See, as the second customer comes on board, and sharing, and giving a co-location on existing tower is beneficial for both customer and us in terms of what the cost efficiency brings.

As the second customer comes and get their network expansion going, I would not say the trend will continue in that direction. However, it is depending on the pace on how the second customer comes on board.

Sorry, I'll just add, Sachin, I think if you look at the trend for the last five or six quarters, we have been very stable, which basically means there is basically more tenancy or more co-location additions than the tower additions, right? I think the stability is a good thing, and going forward, as the second customer comes on board, we might actually see some improvement also.

Lastly, one small follow-up out there. You did mention on Africa, you're on talks with primary customer.

Beyond the primary customer, are you in talks with some incremental customers out there, or as of now, the focus is only on one customer out there?

No, I think, Sachin, we are talking to other customers as well. As I've said in previous call as well is, our long-term strategy is to get started and establish ourselves with the anchor customer.

I think as we'll be present in the market, of course, if we are offering better comparative cost, SLA, and efficiency, the second customer would also be attracted to come towards us. I think the discussions are far more advanced with the anchor customer, and the other customers are being engaged depending on where we are getting the setup done.

Got it. Thank you, and all the best.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity. If I look at the rental income growth adjusted for some of the one-offs, my inference is that the revenue growth is around 4.7% year-on-year.

Could you help us understand the key drivers of this in terms of let's say escalation, revenue increase, contribution from escalation, then new towers, and tenancies, and negative effect of discounts, if any?

I'll take that, Vivekananda. I think, see, I guess you're referring to the full-year growth of 9% that we've reported.

Am I right, service revenue?

I was referring to the 4Q FY 2026 rental income, and I just took out some of the one-offs that were there in the base period, and also the inorganic on the tower purchases that you had done. I had stripped that revenue out as well from both periods to arrive at 4.7%.

I think I'll just maybe explain the number that we have reported. I don't know how the 4.7% is being calculated.

Maybe we can take that offline. For the quarter, we have reported a service revenue year-on-year growth of 5.3%.

As you can see, that's largely driven by the co-location growth. If you look at our co-location numbers year-on-year, you would see a growth of 5.6%.

Then the other growth drivers are typically the annual escalations that we have on our sites as and when they complete the anniversary. Also bear in mind, like I explained in my narrative, there was a one-time settlement benefit in the same quarter of last year that added 2.1 percentage point to our growth.

Broadly, if you adjust for that, then we are closer to 7% growth in the quarter year-on-year, 7, 7.5.

Right. Then the 7.5% growth is also because you acquired towers from Airtel at the end of the quarter, right?

Last year. This

Yes. There was an inorganic element in that.

That's right.

The organic growth will be close to 5% still, right? Or is there

Yeah, 5, 5.5, that's right. That's right.

Okay. Just to drill further on this, the 5.5% growth, if I look at it against the backdrop of co-location growth of 5.6%, annual escalation of 2.5%, why is the growth so muted compared to 7%, 8% growth in prior periods?

Like I explained, there was also, just like we had a reconciliation one-time settlement benefit in the same quarter of last year, this year we had some impact. As a result, the growth was also slightly muted because of that.

It is not fully reflecting the growth in the footprint.

Fair enough. Understood.

Your prognosis in terms of the order book visibility and organic growth adjusted for some of these factors, how should we think about it let's say for FY 2027 or 2028, if you have any color?

Vivekananda, I think I would hesitate in giving numbers because as we really don't give any forward-looking numbers. Broadly, I think in terms of the rollout momentum and all, of course, while I mentioned that the order book is healthy, but at the same time, we need to also take into consideration the fact that there is a supply chain disruption that we are facing because we are in the middle of a geopolitical situation.

I think Prachur can elaborate that maybe later on, but we need to be a bit cautious when we talk about forward-looking views.

I think as Vikas was mentioning, there is a strong order book looking ahead as well the next few quarters. However, I think given the situation, there is a little bit of a tightness in the market in terms of tower supplies, because that is dependent on LPG availability.

Having said that, we have managed to mitigate some of those things by supply chain working with the partners, etc. Hence, looking forward, there are some factors which are not entirely predictable, but at the basis of it, the order book looks strong.

Whatever supply chain disruptions happen, we are putting efforts to mitigate them and continue to deploy towers to meet the order book.

Great. My last question is on the dividend.

At the time of the board resolution that you had sought to acquire towers from Airtel, you had mentioned that the funding of those towers will happen using debt, and also the commentary in prior periods had suggested that there would be some element of distribution of fiscal '25 cash flow also, cash accruals also, which the management perhaps at a certain point of time, maybe last year the management had taken a view that it was in the best interest of conservatism to hold on to that cash. Why has that cash not been released and only the cash flow generated for FY 2026 been decided to be earmarked as dividends?

Honestly speaking, I don't think the board compartmentalized the cash flows in that category. I think what the board did is they evaluated the full FCF, looked at the debt levels that we want to maintain, and decided to distribute the FCF of FY 2026.

As I said earlier, the board is committed to distribute the FCF to the shareholders, and we'll try to maintain the steady and progressive distribution going forward. Anything else you want to add?

No, I think it's a very holistic view one needs to take. See, we are in a very dynamic situation, right?

Basically, given the current situation, the current debt levels, etc., I think the board has fully considered all aspects and finally decided to distribute dividends to the extent of about 37, 38 billion, which, whichever way you look at it, like Prachur said, you just can't compartmentalize all these things within, let's say, how much is pertaining to that particular transaction and how much is from this year's cash, and so on. Broadly how we are looking at it is the cash flow for full year has been fully distributed.

Got it. Thank you.

Thanks. Thanks for the opportunity.

I have a few of them. First on the maintenance part which you spoke, which has led to a higher cost, Vikas, in your opening remark.

Just wanted to understand, was this a one-time exercise or you think because the towers have been aging now, this will be an annual phenomena for us and hence the cost base has got reset?

No, Sanjesh, I don't think that is the case. If you look at typically historically as well, Q4 is typically marked by two things.

One is, Q3 and Q4 are the quarters where we have a clear weather. Lot of the operational and tower maintenance activities are scheduled in this part of the quarter because the weather supports it.

Secondly, in Q4 as well, what we're doing is we're preparing for the coming season. I think typically the network maintenance activities are lopsided towards Q3 and Q4.

However, if you remember in Q1 call itself, what we have done is we've taken a conscious effort to spend a certain part of cost on doing more tower maintenance strengthening activities, as the portfolio is at a certain age. However, it is not a structural cost that is going to permanently increase.

There is some part which are routine activity that is going to be continuously done with the rigor of making sure it is done. I don't think we would say the cost base has fundamentally reset.

I think our cost per tower still remains in line, or actually, if you look at the holistic picture from the last three, four years, our cost per tower has actually gone down. There are certain elements of cost on absolute cost that show up.

Just look at the tower count and look at the cost with that mirror.

Sanjesh, I just want to add one thing for perspective. While you're looking at a three-month, but what is also important is to look at the full year, right?

Sometimes you have basically activities skewed towards a particular quarter, but from a full-year perspective, what you will see is the tower cost or maintenance cost increase is not even reflecting the volume increase, because we are offsetting a lot of these increases either due to volume or aging portfolio, etc., through the various efficiency initiatives that we are driving.

Vikas, it's more like a seasonality. It sounds like a seasonality rather than a maintenance

In a way, you could say it's seasonality because Sanjesh, operations is never binary in that sense. I think seasonality, portfolio maintenance, I think all these come together, and that's what Vikas is saying.

You have to look at the full year. You have to look at the volume of towers being added and look at the cost from that perspective.

Clearly. Clearly.

Just second question on the single-tenancy towers. The assumption was that as the Vodafone scales up, the single-tenancy towers will come down.

We don't have data for this quarter, but if I analyze the data for Q3, it appears that we have added more single-tenancy tower not just accommodating Bharti, but also accommodating Vodafone. Will this trend continues, and what is driving additional tenancy addition for Vodafone?

I thought we have covered well pan-India during the Bharti rollout.

I'm not very clear on the question, but let me try to answer. At the end of the day, both in Q3 and Q4, if I'm not wrong, correct me if I'm wrong, our co-location additions have been higher than the tower additions.

Fundamentally, there are single-tenancy towers that getting converted to multi-tenant tower. That is the first point.

Secondly, for any customer to expand, they have their own network expansion strategy. While bulk may come through second tenant as a co-location addition, but there will be some single-tenant towers as well being added.

Any customer when expands, look at both. The first priority is to come as a second tenant and then, but the network requirement or their network design will be based on the addition of a tower, whether it's a single tenant or a multi-tenant.

Yeah.

I would leave it that at.

No, no. Just let me probably clarify on that question.

Last quarter, we added 3,800 new towers. Bharti side count went up by 1,150, 1,200.

That means we have added around 2,000 more towers in previous quarter than what Bharti has added, which I would attribute it to Vodafone, which was appeared to be quite a large number from a fresh tower addition for Vodafone. The base assumption was that considering both have an 1800 MHz frequency RF planning, a lot will overlap each other's network, but it appears that we will require to add more tower when Vodafone rollout starts.

Sanjesh, I think there is a correction. I think the assumption that every single tower that the difference that you mentioned between 1,100 and 3,000 is coming from the other customer, I think there's some gap to that because there are certain towers we also add for either customer where they are while they may not see a net addition in their portfolio, but it is typically at the end of the tenure, they move certain towers from other incumbents to Indus or the other way, right?

I think there is a portfolio that we also add in our setup which is moving the tower or the tenancy from someone else to Indus. I think it's not a direct subtraction that total Indus minus one customer is equal to the other customer.

I think there's a big element of movement of tower from one tower company to the other, which is not a net addition for a customer.

No, that's fair enough. Got the point.

Just one last question on Africa. When should we expect operations to start?

Probably 6 months down the line will be a fair assumption?

As I mentioned earlier, I think we are at a very close stage of starting our first tower deployment in Zambia. I think 6 months is more than a fair estimate.

I think it's probably earlier than that. We've got the license and we are on the ground now.

Yes, we're looking to put our first tower very soon.

Got it. Got it.

We have set up NOC and all, right, in Africa? Or we will do it through India?

I think we will find a solution. I think we'll have to depend whether we manage from here or whether we do it locally.

I think we'll have to see. I think, as of now, the focus is to deploy the towers.

Got it. Got it.

Thanks, Prachur. Thanks, Vikas, for all those answers, and best of luck for the coming quarters.

Thank you. Thank you, Sanjesh.

Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone.

Thanks for the opportunity. Vikas and Prachur, my question once again going to the sequential drop in the EBITDA that you have said.

If I put it on a per-tower basis, how we are looking at is that there is a drop in EBITDA per tower on a sequential basis roughly around ₹1,500 per tower per month. Not everything is coming from the safe maintenance, because again on a per-tower basis on a reported basis, it is just contributing 20% of the increases from decreases coming from the maintenance.

It seems large part of the EBITDA per-tower decrease on a sequential basis is coming from the revenue per tower or sharing revenue per tower. Can you help us reconcile this difference?

Arun, I think there's more than one reason for this. Of course there is, like I explained, there is some one-off sitting in the revenue, which is because of the settlements that have happened in quarter four.

That's impacting the top line as well as the EBITDA. Apart from that, if you see the other lines, I think even the network maintenance, as we were explaining, is growing 5.6% quarter-on-quarter, which is largely driven by the activities, maintenance activities, etc., that we undertook in quarter four.

That has impacted. Apart from that, if you look at the other expenses, we had some one-off there also, and that is also basically showing a big quarter-on-quarter increase because of the one-off benefits sitting in the previous quarter.

There are basically two, three reasons why EBITDA sequential performance in quarter four has been slightly worse off than the previous quarter. Broadly, we are still talking about a 55% EBITDA margin, which is quite healthy.

From a full-year perspective, I think we are pretty much in line with our expectation of 55% plus sort of an EBITDA level.

Okay. The one-offs that you are saying that is there in the Q3 and on a revenue side, you are saying that the negative one-off is there on the revenue only on the Q4, but on the cost side, you are saying that one-off is there in the Q3 cost.

That's right. There is a positive one-off in Q3, and there is a negative one-off in Q4.

Somewhere the impact of that is getting more pronounced in the EBITDA.

No problem. I'll take this offline separately.

My second question again, I don't want to look at it from the Q4 basis, but if I look at from the second-half basis, I see two trends. One is that our exits in the second half is twice that of our usual annual run rate.

I'm talking about second half FY 2026. Second, our energy margins in second half is again better than either the first or the second half in the previous year.

How should we look at this?

I think see, I'll answer both of them one by one operationally, and then you can comment on the numbers. See, as far as the exits are concerned or the churn is concerned, I think it is most of these churns are BAU, business-as-usual, kind of a churn, and I think typically if you look at, they typically get replaced by a relocation tenancy, and it is typically done because of safety reasons or landlord renewal.

The number is not that concerning for us because typically these are offset by a relocation site that we make. Right?

From a net tenancy point of view, there is no loss, right? This is an operational churn that we in in a large portfolio like this, we expect this to happen.

On the energy margin, we have discussed this earlier as well. H2 seasonally is much better than H1.

By default, the operating cost or the the impacts or the variations that we see are lower in the second half than in first half. If you look historically as well, H1 has a has a so it's primarily H2 is primarily driven by a seasonal improvement, and H1 is primarily impacted by a seasonal impact.

I think unless there is

Yeah. No, no, I don't think there's anything major sort of something different that I have to say.

I think what is very important to bear in mind is H1 has clearly more weather-related impacts and weather disruptions in our operation. H2 is generally better from that perspective, and hence most of the maintenance and safety activities that we undertake are more skewed towards H2, which basically means as and when we build new towers and try to relocate from unsafe towers and so on, you see more exits in H2 than H1, right?

There's always a seasonality angle in our business.

Energy margins in H2 is even lower than the last year's H2. That is like-to-like comparison, right?

How do you explain that?

See, energy margin, Arun, I would suggest one is energy margin is a function of revenue and cost and how we settle the differences, right? The seasonality will clearly show you the cost trend, and you will see the cost trend is better in H2 versus H1.

The margin trend is a function of when you are settling things. If you are settling things more in H2, then to that extent, I think it is a function of how things are getting settled or the timing of settlement, right?

I would suggest don't read too much into the margin. When it comes to margin, timing-wise things could vary.

Look at full year. When it comes to cost, look at seasonality.

I think look at the margin on year-on-year basis. If I'm not wrong, I think the margin this year is same or even slightly better than last year.

I think look at a full-year from an energy margin perspective.

Yeah.

While we are on this energy margin topic, just hypothetically say if the diesel price or grid electricity price have to go up, absolute margins will remain as a percentage, will it remain same and hence our absolute negative margin and energy will go up, or the other way around, the negative energy margin remains same, but as a percentage it will reduce?

See, at the end of the day, when it happens as a price, it impacts revenue and cost, right? It impacts both revenue and cost on almost a similar basis.

From a reconciliation perspective, I think the percentage may change because there will be some sort of an absolute difference, but it will not be a material change from a percentage margin point of view. Of course, the cost and revenue will change accordingly.

My understanding is if percentage remains same, then increase in price will further push down

I would not say exactly the same. I think there will be an impact on the margin as well, but the larger impact will be seen on the absolute revenue and absolute cost.

Okay. One final accounting clarification.

I think earlier you were talking about the annual escalation rate reflecting as part of the revenue growth. My understanding is the revenue equalization standards would ensure that escalation should not be contributing at least on a annual revenue growth, right?

On a per-tower basis.

Arun, there are a lot of nuances in this in terms of the lease accounting. I would suggest we take this offline.

We can take you through the workings offline.

Understood. Thank you very much, and all the best.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity. These are actually both follow-ups to previous questions.

Firstly, just back on the question of your tower additions, say, which have averaged close to around 4,000-odd over the last three quarters, and one of your large customers has been adding 1,500, 2,000. You said the difference could be partly because of new tower additions for other customers as well as some potential churn that happens.

Would one of these two factors have a higher bearing than the other, just trying to get a sense of which one could be a bigger contributor?

No, I would not put a number because it varies by quarter. At the end of the day, it's a net tenancy addition to Indus, it does impact the revenue positively.

That is the main takeaway. The split is not a fixed number, as I said.

Okay. Where I was coming from is because obviously there's a lot of this chatter about renewals for the third customer, and if that could lead to churn for you.

The point I was trying to add is, is there a potential offsetting factor? Do these cancel each other?

I know you've said that there are a lot of considerations if a tenant chooses to move from one tower company to the other, but I was just trying to get some more granularity on that.

See, if I was you, I would primarily look at the net additions of the tower portfolio and tenancies. I think that's where because churn gets offset by relocation.

It's not a net tenancy addition, but it's not a net loss. However, if we get a tower from somebody else where the current operator is operating with someone else and moves to Indus, that's a net addition to Indus.

I would look at the overall net addition of towers and tenancies to Indus to make your own trends.

This is where you're saying that so far the order book or pipeline is quite all right for the coming few quarters? Yeah.

Yeah. Thank you.

Just my second question was on the energy margins. Now with the 50% increase in bulk diesel prices, how does that impact your energy costs?

Is there a lead-lag impact where maybe it hits you first and then you pass it on? If you can just provide some sort of color on this.

No, there is no lag. I think we bill actually on actuals.

As I was explaining earlier, if the retail pricing has an impact, it will impact both our revenue and cost on an equal basis. The net margin may have a slight impact towards negative side, but the major impact comes on the revenue and cost on an equal basis.

Right? There is no lag.

We bill as it actually happens.

This actually did happen in March, because bulk diesel prices were increased quite sharply.

That was industrial. That was industrial diesel price.

It was not the retail, which we buy retail diesel.

Oh, I was under the impression that tower companies use bulk diesel. That's not the case, is it?

No, no. No, no.

Okay. Great.

Thank you for the clarification. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity. Am I audible, sir?

Yeah.

Just to clarify on our renewals, since your contracts are structured tower-wise or site-wise, as you said, with respect to Reliance Jio, for the tower-wise contracts that have expired, have there been any non-renewals or site exits from Jio?

No, I think for all the customers, we always have a portfolio which are not renewed and we work with them and they get renewed. Yes, even for our Jio, there are certain tenancies that have expired which are still operating, and some churn have happened which we report.

I think it's not a one or the other way. It's not that all the non-renewed have expired or have been churned.

That's not the case. In fact, very minor percentages have been churned.

Okay. The contracts renewals happened, so that are at the same commercial terms as earlier contracts, no incremental discount or price concession we have given to them?

If the renewal doesn't happen, I think we continue operating the same way.

That's helpful. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

To conclude, FY 2026 reflects consistent execution across our strategic priorities, with our core business continuing to demonstrate resilience and steady growth, supported by healthy co-location additions and sustained customer network expansion. Our plan to expand into Africa is a testament to our agile approach to growth, which will also be enabled by investments in digital and AI-led capabilities.

Given our proven execution track record, focus on efficiency, and long-term capital discipline, we remain confident in our ability to deliver sustainable growth and create long-term value for all our stakeholders. Thank you, and have a good day.