Anant Raj · NSE ANANTRAJ
Real estate developer pivoting to colocation data centres · capacity ladder secondary, annual report FY2024-25 read for capacity, the audit opinion and the consolidated statements
307 megawatts announced.
8 actually handed over.
The same problem as the rest of this sector, in a different vocabulary. Sify calls the gap built against sold. Here it is announced against operational against handed over, and the drop between the last two sits inside a number the company already calls operational.
Announced
307MW
Target by Fiscal 2032, against roughly 2.1 billion dollars of capex.
Called operational
28MW
Manesar 21, Panchkula 7.
Handed over
8MW
The rest was still in the handover process.
Delivered
2.6%of announced
Handed over as a share of the target.
Exhibit 1
Each rung is a different question, and only the last one earns
Megawatts. Bar length is proportional; the drop between rungs is the finding.
- Announced307 MW
Target IT load by Fiscal 2032, against roughly 2.1 billion dollars of stated capex. A plan, not an asset.
- Operational28 MW
IT load described as operational across the two live campuses, Manesar and Panchkula.
- Handed over8 MW
Colocation completely handed over to customers. The remainder was still in the handover process.
From announced to operational is a 91 per cent drop. From operational to handed over is another 71 per cent, and that one is hidden inside a figure already described as operational.
Source: Blueprint research note, BharatAI Infra Scope, quoting Value Research: only 8 MW of colocation had been completely handed over, while the rest was still in the handover process, and operational capacity is not the same as handed over capacity. A separate campus level record puts Anant Raj Cloud at 307 MW announced against 21 MW live, which disagrees with the 28 MW figure. Both are recorded and neither is averaged.
Exhibit 2
The same gap, two companies, two vocabularies
Each estate indexed to its own widest rung = 100.
Anant Raj
- Announced100
- Operational9
- Handed over3
Sify Infinit Spaces
- Built100
- Installed70
- Sold60
Sify keeps 60 per cent of its widest number by the time it reaches revenue. Anant Raj keeps 2.6 per cent. One is measuring a built estate and the other a plan, and the words do not warn you which.
Source: Anant Raj from the research note; Sify from its draft red herring prospectus, printed pages 49 and 301.
Exhibit 3
Two sources disagree by a quarter of the estate
Operational capacity, megawatts. Both figures recorded, neither averaged.
Blueprint research note, Manesar 21 plus Panchkula 7
The figure this coverage recorded before the annual report was cited
A seven megawatt disagreement on a 28 megawatt estate is a quarter of the number. The annual report dissolved it rather than picking a side: 21 is Manesar alone and 28 is Manesar plus Panchkula, which are two rungs of one ladder rather than two readings of one rung. Both figures are kept because the disagreement is what sent a reader to the filing.
Source: Blueprint research note, BharatAI Infra Scope, quoting Value Research: only 8 MW of colocation had been completely handed over, while the rest was still in the handover process, and operational capacity is not the same as handed over capacity. A separate campus level record puts Anant Raj Cloud at 307 MW announced against 21 MW live, which disagrees with the 28 MW figure. Both are recorded and neither is averaged.
Exhibit 4
Four of the six forensic pillars carry a row, and the rest name the one document that carries them
Severity against likelihood, an analyst grading rather than the company's. A chip is filled where the magnitude is derived from the figures recorded for this name and outlined where the row is judgement. 2 of 7 rows cite a printed page.
| Severity | Low | Medium | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| High | 0204 | 0105 | |
| Medium | 07 | 0306 | |
| Low |
Likelihood, across
- 01
Capacity the company calls operational is not capacity a customer has taken, and the drop between the two is hidden inside a figure already described as operational.
High severity, high likelihood
71.43 per cent of what is called operational. Capacity described as operational, less what is actually handed over.
This is the same gap the Sify pages call built against sold, in a different vocabulary. Neither company uses the other's words, and nothing in either set of words warns a reader which rung is being quoted.
Mitigant. The remainder is described as still in the handover process rather than as stalled, so some of it is a queue rather than a failure.
- 02
The announced target is more than thirty times what has actually been handed over, and the schedule to it runs to Fiscal 2032.
High severity, medium likelihood
2.61 per cent of the announced target. Handed over against the target for Fiscal 2032.
The site does not grade this claim yet, because its horizon has not passed. It is recorded so that it can be.
Mitigant. A long horizon is not by itself a broken promise. The target is dated, so it can be graded later rather than argued about now.
- 03
Two sources give two different figures for operational capacity, and the disagreement is a quarter of the estate.
Medium severity, high likelihood
25 per cent of the operational estate in dispute. Two recorded figures for operational capacity, neither averaged.
This is a disclosure risk rather than a board governance one. Nothing about the board, the auditor or related parties has been read, so the governance pillar stays empty rather than borrowing this row.
Mitigant. Both figures are recorded here and neither is averaged, so a reader sees the disagreement rather than a number that hides it.
- 04
The target carries a stated capital cost in billions of dollars, against a balance sheet nobody here has opened.
High severity, medium likelihood
2.1 billion dollars of stated capex. Stated cost of reaching the target for Fiscal 2032.
The magnitude here is the size of the programme, not an assessment of whether it can be funded. The stated cost is in dollars and the consolidated balance sheet is in rupees, and no exchange rate is read anywhere here, so the two are recorded side by side rather than divided into one another.
Mitigant. None stated. Funding, gearing and the capital already committed sit in the audited financial statements inside the annual report.
- 05
The business the market prices this company on has no published revenue line. The group reports one segment and it is real estate development, so the data centre arm's revenue, margin and return exist nowhere in the consolidated accounts.
High severity, high likelihood · printed page 260
1.04 per cent of consolidated revenue, the data centre arm. Anant Raj Cloud Private Limited turnover against group revenue, FY2024-25.
The magnitude is the arm's turnover against consolidated revenue. Whether that revenue is recognised well cannot be assessed from a single column with no disaggregation, no receivable and no contract balance beside it.
Mitigant. The arm's turnover and result are printed once, as a column in the statement of subsidiaries, and the same figures appear again in the consolidated entity table. That is enough to size it, and it is not enough to test the quality of it.
- 06
Reported operating cash flow nets a financing item into operations. The movement in current borrowings is presented among the working capital adjustments, so the figure is built on a different definition from the one a screen or a peer comparison assumes.
Medium severity, high likelihood · printed page 224
84.77 per cent of the operating cash flow the statement files. A finance item presented among the working capital adjustments, FY2024-25.
The direction is worth stating: the classification lowers reported operating cash flow rather than lifting it, so the company screens worse on cash conversion than the conventional presentation would show. The risk is comparability, not flattery.
Mitigant. The line is disclosed on its own row rather than buried in an aggregate, and the repayment of borrowings is shown again under finance activities, so a reader who reads both sections can restate it. The audit opinion on the statements is unmodified.
- 07
A real estate developer is building and operating colocation, which is a different business with different customers, different uptime obligations and a different cost base.
Medium severity, medium likelihood
No magnitude. This row is graded, and nothing on the page pretends otherwise.
Not measured, and marked as such. There is no figure that captures whether a pivot is being executed well, and inventing one would be worse than grading it openly.
Mitigant. Land and construction capability are genuine transferable advantages, and they are the two things a pure colocation entrant usually lacks.
Pillar coverage
Revenue quality
1 risk
Cash conversion
1 risk
Balance sheet
1 risk
Governance
no row, nothing read
Business model
4 risks
Valuation
no row, nothing read
Two of the six pillars carry no row. Governance is one: the related party note and the board report inside the same annual report are where that evidence is printed. Valuation is the other, and it is a harder absence, because the group reports a single segment and that segment is real estate development, so the data centre arm has no published revenue, margin or return on capital at any level of detail and no multiple can be struck against it. The rows that do rest on the annual report cite the page they were read from; the rows that rest on the research note carry no page and say so.
2 of 7 risks sit in the worst cell, and 6 of 7 carry a figure derived from the recorded numbers rather than a grade, and 2 rest on a printed page. Severity and likelihood are analyst gradings, not the company's. A magnitude marked measured is derived from the figures recorded for this name, and those figures come from a research note rather than from a filing. Derived is not the same as filed, and each row says which it is.
No row is graded low on either axis, so the bottom row and the left column of the matrix stand empty. That is a property of the register rather than of the company: these are the risks worth writing down, not a survey of every risk the filing lists.
Source: Blueprint research note, BharatAI Infra Scope, quoting Value Research: only 8 MW of colocation had been completely handed over, while the rest was still in the handover process, and operational capacity is not the same as handed over capacity. A separate campus level record puts Anant Raj Cloud at 307 MW announced against 21 MW live, which disagrees with the 28 MW figure. Both are recorded and neither is averaged. The rows on revenue quality and cash conversion rest on the FY2024-25 annual report instead, at printed pages 224 and 260.
Exhibit 5
The 28 MW everyone repeats is 6 MW operational and 22 MW that is not
Megawatts of IT load, from the company's own annual report for FY2024-25. The headline figure and the parts it is made of are both printed in that report, on different pages, and it never subtracts one from the other.
- Operationalised at Manesar6 MW
- Additional at Manesar, ready to operationalise15 MW
- Panchkula, advance stage7 MW
The highlights page prints 28 MW beside the words “operational and advance stage to operationalise”. The qualifier is the half that does not travel. Two pages earlier the same report says what is actually operational: 6 MW at Manesar, of which 0.5 MW is cloud services rather than colocation.
This also settles the disagreement drawn above. The two figures recorded there, 28 and 21, were never a contradiction. One is Manesar alone, operational plus ready. The other adds Panchkula. They are two rungs of the same ladder, and neither of them is the operational figure.
The audit opinion on this report is unmodified, from Ranjana Vandana and Co.. Standalone and consolidated, for the year ended 31 March 2025, at printed page 112. The consolidated statements it covers are set out below.
Source: Anant Raj Limited annual report FY2024-25, corporate overview highlights and the management discussion, which state the same three parts in the same words in two places. Printed page 3.
Exhibit 6
The data centre arm is 1.0 per cent of group revenue, and it loses money
Squares are rupees of consolidated revenue, one hundred in total. Amounts in INR lakh, the unit the statements print, converted nowhere.
Turnover, FY2024-25
2,151.36INR lakh
1.0 per cent of the group's 2,05,997.42. Printed page 79.
Result for the year
minus 252.99INR lakh
The group made 42,581.86 in the same year. Printed pages 79 and 268, which agree.
Net assets
minus 866.44INR lakh
Total assets 12,196.69 against liabilities of 13,063.13. Wholly owned, 100 per cent.
Figures are the subsidiary's own, not an allocation. They appear in the statement of subsidiaries and again in the consolidated entity table, and the two agree to the paisa. Neither appears in the group income statement, which reports one segment.
The megawatts at the top of this page belong to Anant Raj Cloud Private Limited. In the year read it turned over 2,151.36 INR lakh against the group's 2,05,997.42, lost 252.99 while the group made 42,581.86, and closed the year with liabilities exceeding assets by 866.44.
None of that appears in the group income statement. Note 40, at printed page 260, reads: “The Company's business activities which are primarily real estate development and related activities fall within a single reportable segment as the management of the Company views the entire business activities as real estate development.” There is one reportable segment and it is real estate development, so no data centre revenue, margin or asset line is published anywhere in the consolidated accounts. The capacity is disclosed in the corporate overview. The economics of it are disclosed only as one column in a statement of subsidiaries.
The same note records that “The Company did not have any external revenue from a particular customer which exceeded 10% of total revenue.” That is the opposite shape to the other operator read here, where three counterparties are two thirds of revenue. Selling homes to many buyers and selling megawatts to a few hyperscalers are different businesses, and this company's revenue is still almost entirely the first one.
Source: Anant Raj Limited annual report FY2024-25, Form AOC-1, statement containing salient features of the financial statement of subsidiaries, Part A, printed page 79, and note 48 to the consolidated financial statements, printed page 268.
Exhibit 7
Capital spending was 1.03 times the cash operations produced, or 0.56, depending on where one line sits
Amounts in INR lakh, the unit the consolidated statements print, converted nowhere. Capital expenditure is the four lines the investing section prints, summed. Both bars on the left are the year as filed; both on the right are the same year with one working capital line taken back out.
Capital expenditure is the same in both pairs and is the sum of 4 lines: acquisition of property, plant and equipment, acquisition of investment property, capital work in progress, right to use assets. The multiple above each pair is capex divided by operating cash flow, shown only where capex was the larger of the two.
Operating activities
“Increase/(decrease) in current borrowings”
8,189.39
Outflow, printed page 224. The year before carries 4,571.44 on the same line.
Finance activities
“Proceeds/(repayment) from borrowings”
7,818.45
Outflow, printed page 225. The year before carries 40,699.96 on the same line.
Capital expenditure was 9,914.60 INR lakh. Against the operating cash flow the statement files, 9,661.02, the spending is 1.03 times the cash. Take the borrowings movement back out and operating cash flow is 17,850.41, and the same spending is 0.56 times it. The building did not change size. One line changed section.
Borrowings reach a reader twice in this statement. The movement in them sits among the working capital adjustments inside operating activities at printed page 224, and the repayment of them appears again under finance activities on the page after it. Both filed years do it, so the classification is a habit rather than a one year effect.
The other operator read here, whose figures come from a filed prospectus, absorbed 1.87 times the cash its operations produced across 4 filed periods. That is a capital programme outrunning the business by a wide margin, and it is visible without reclassifying anything. What sits on this page is narrower and turns on where a line is printed rather than on how much was spent.
Source: Anant Raj Limited annual report FY2024-25, Consolidated Cash Flow Statement for the year ended March 31, 2025. The movement in current borrowings is presented inside operating activities as a working capital adjustment, and repayment of borrowings is presented again under finance activities. Printed pages 224 and 225.
Exhibit 8
Operating cash is 0.23 times the profit reported beside it, and the accrual ratio calls the same year clean
Two measures of one idea, on both readings of the statement. The amounts behind them are in INR lakh. The thresholds are the ones published on the methodology page, applied here from the same file that publishes them.
| Period | Operating cash to profit after taxtimes | Sloan accrual ratioper cent of total assets |
|---|---|---|
| FY2024-25, as filed | 0.23xoutside | 7.7%within |
| FY2024-25, borrowings line removed | 0.42xoutside | 6.1%within |
- Operating cash to profit after tax
- Below 0.8 is a flag and below 0.5 is serious.
- Sloan accrual ratio
- Outside plus or minus 25 per cent is the danger line.
The two measures disagree, and the disagreement is the useful part. Profit is not arriving as cash, which the first reports and the second does not, because the second adds investing cash back into its numerator. On a company whose spending is small against its balance sheet that addition leaves the ratio calm. Neither is wrong. One asks whether profit became cash and the other asks whether the balance sheet is accumulating accruals, and only the first of those is failing here.
The result holds on both readings. As the statement files it, operating cash is 0.23 times profit after tax. With the borrowings movement taken back out of operating activities it is 0.42. Both sit under the threshold, so the reading does not depend on settling which presentation is the right one.
Source: Anant Raj Limited annual report FY2024-25, Statement of Consolidated Profit and Loss for the year ended March 31, 2025, printed page 223; the cash flow statement at printed pages 224 and 225; and the consolidated balance sheet at printed page 222.
Exhibit 9
11 counterparties have been struck off the register, and 99.7 per cent of what they owe is one company the report does not call a related party
Balances outstanding with companies struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, in INR lakh. Receivables and payables are kept apart rather than netted: money owed to a company removed from the register and money owed by it are not the same exposure.
Vibrant Softech Private Limited
5,000.00
Others · 99.7% of everything receivable from this list
The other 7 receivable rows, added together
14.92
Drawn on the same scale as the bar above it, which is the exhibit.
| Counterparty | Relationship | Direction | This year | Year before |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vibrant Softech Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 5,000.00 | 5,000.00 |
| Deep Buildtech Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 10.60 | 10.60 |
| Anant Raj Power Limited | Related party | Owed by it | 9.22 | 9.22 |
| Ganesha Carpet Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 2.16 | 2.16 |
| Raghunath Oils and Fats Limited | Others | Owed by it | 2.00 | 2.00 |
| Prabhakar Sanitations Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 1.11 | 1.11 |
| Corn Flower Developers Private Limited | Related party | Owed by it | 0.60 | 0.60 |
| Aravali Propmart Private Limited | Related party | Owed to the company | 0.45 | 0.61 |
| Corn Flower Buildcon Private Limited | Related party | Owed to the company | 0.44 | 0.44 |
| Anant Raj Meadows Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 0.16 | 0.16 |
| Tauras Promoters and Developers Private Limited | Others | Owed to the company | 0.004 | 0.004 |
10 of the 11 balances are identical to the year before, to the paisa. A balance with a company that has been removed from the register and has not moved in twelve months is not being settled.
Note 45 sits a few notes below the related party disclosures and 4 of its 11 rows are related parties, so the natural reading is that this is a related party problem. It is not. The largest balance on the list is 5,000 owed to the company by Vibrant Softech Private Limited, which the report classifies as Others, and it is larger than everything else receivable on the list put together by a factor of 335.
The same note is where the related party lending shows up. Loans outstanding to associates went from 875.29 to 3,969.54 in one year, and loans to relatives of key management from 174 to 1,229.1. The company's own words on all of it are that “The transactions with related parties are made on terms equivalent to those that prevail in arm's length transactions.”
The associates row does not roll forward. The transactions table says 3,969.54 was lent during the year and prints no repayment from associates. Added to the balance a year earlier that gives 4,844.83, against a closing balance of 3,969.54, a gap of 875.29. An associate leaving the perimeter would account for it and so would a presentation choice in either table. The report says neither, and what the gap is has not been named here.
Source: Anant Raj Limited annual report FY2024-25, note 45 to the consolidated financial statements, other statutory information, on transactions with companies struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. Printed page 266.
What the report still does not carry
A segment that does not exist cannot be measured
The group publishes one segment, so several of the measures that matter for a data centre operator have no published value for this company at any level of detail. A margin, a return on capital or a revenue per megawatt for the arm would each need a numerator the report does not print.
- A data centre revenue line, which the single segment disclosure does not provide
- A margin or return on capital for the data centre arm
- Revenue per megawatt, which needs a numerator the report does not print
- Contracted or let capacity at the three campuses
- Related party transaction detail beyond the parties named
Sify is the name with the deepest disclosure here, and the difference in what can be said about the two is the difference between a headline and a filed statement.