> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.moatmarginresearch.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Waaree: Margin Down 5.4 Points, Tariff Refund Undated - URL: https://www.moatmarginresearch.com/waaree-energies-q2-margin-tariff-refund/ - Published: 2026-10-28T02:50:25.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-28T02:50:25.000Z - Description: Waaree's Q2 revenue rose 23.9% but its EBITDA margin fell to 17.8% from 23.2%. A ₹360.40 crore US tariff refund sits in revenue; the quarter is not stated. - Author: A K Karthikeyan - Tags: Moat Insights **The idea in one sentence: when a trade-policy refund is booked inside revenue and the filing does not date it, the reported margin is really two numbers, and Waaree Energies' notes show a refund on one side and an open US customs finding on the other.** ## The fact that breaks the assumption Waaree Energies' revenue from operations for the September 2026 quarter (Q2 FY27) was ₹7,517.7 crore, up 23.9% on a year earlier (\[PR\], consolidated). Its Operating EBITDA, the company's own measure, was ₹1,335.2 crore, down 5.1%. The margin was 17.8%, against 23.2% a year earlier. Profit after tax was ₹753.6 crore, down 14.2% (\[PR\]). Revenue up 23.9%, profit down 14.2%. And the same results carry a ₹360.40 crore credit that the company books as revenue. ## One note, followed Note 6 to the consolidated results says that, following a US Supreme Court verdict declaring the reciprocal duties unlawful, and "based on the status of refund claims accepted by CBP", the group "during the period" has "recognised income in relation to refund of reciprocal duties levied under IEEPA tariffs" of ₹360.40 crore "(net of amount due to customer)", booked "as other operating revenue". A further ₹25.13 crore went "as a reduction from cost of asset and inventory" (\[RS\], consolidated notes, PDF page 13). The revenue line in the results statement points to this note (\[RS\], page 9). Three things the note does not say. Which quarter holds the refund: the results statement has columns for the June quarter, the September quarter and the six months, and the note says only "during the period". Whether the Operating EBITDA in the press release includes it. And how much has actually been received in cash. The parent company's own (standalone) note recognises ₹282.30 crore of the same kind of refund as other operating revenue (\[RS\], standalone note 6, page 19). The remaining ₹78.10 crore of the group figure is not in the parent's number (our arithmetic); the filings do not say in which entities. ## What we can work out without the quarter The press release gives no definition of Operating EBITDA. But in each of the five columns of the results statement it equals profit before tax, plus finance costs, plus depreciation, less other income, taken from the results statement (\[RS\], page 9). For Q2 FY27: 1,029.75 + 105.26 + 347.26 − 147.07 = ₹1,335.2 crore, which matches the press release; the June quarter and the half-year columns reconcile the same way (our arithmetic). Because the refund is in revenue from operations, a measure built this way carries it, in whichever quarter it was booked. That is our reading; the company has not said so. The investor presentation (slide 11) lays out its profit and loss the same way, with other income listed below Operating EBITDA. If the whole ₹360.40 crore sits inside the six-month figures and inside Operating EBITDA, then the half year looks like this (our arithmetic): | Six months to 30 Sep (consolidated) | FY26 | FY27 as reported | FY27 less the refund (scenario) | | ----------------------------------- | --------------- | ---------------- | ------------------------------- | | Revenue from operations | ₹10,491.5 crore | ₹15,449.5 crore | ₹15,089.1 crore | | Operating EBITDA | ₹2,403.7 crore | ₹2,775.1 crore | ₹2,414.7 crore | | Margin | 22.9% | 18.0% | 16.0% | | EBITDA change on FY26 | | +15.5% | +0.5% | The reported figures are \[PR\]'s. The last column removes ₹360.40 crore from both revenue and EBITDA and is ours. Its base is also not clean: the filings do not say whether the first half of FY26 held any one-off credits of its own. So the fair statement is narrow. Under the scenario, the half-year's 15.5% EBITDA growth is close to flat. For the September quarter alone, the answer depends on the missing quarter. If none of the refund is in it, the margin is the reported 17.8%. If all of it is, the margin is 13.6% ((1,335.2 − 360.4) ÷ (7,517.7 − 360.4), our arithmetic). The truth sits in that range, and the filings do not say where. One more check removes the quarter question for the trend. The June quarter was ₹7,931.8 crore of revenue and ₹1,439.9 crore of EBITDA, a margin of 18.2% (our arithmetic), against 22.5% in the June quarter a year earlier. The margin had already stepped down before September. It is a half-year pattern, not a September event. ## The mechanism Our reading: a solar manufacturer's margin is made of things it controls (what it pays for materials, how much of the chain it makes itself) and things it does not (tariffs, duty rulings, customs findings). Both kinds flow through the same lines. In Waaree's case the filings show the second kind in both directions at once. The first direction is the refund above. The second is in Note 5\. In the prior year US Customs and Border Protection began an investigation under the Enforce and Protect Act into the origin of components in modules Waaree exports to the United States, covering duties "since January 2021". The company booked a provision of ₹294.78 crore (US$32.782 million) as an exceptional item in the year to 31 March 2026 (\[RS\], consolidated results and Note 5). During the period ended 30 September 2026 it received a notice of determination of evasion. The consolidated note says CBP "identified certain entries which are covered under AD/CVD orders", that Waaree has asked for an administrative review, and that "Pending final outcome, no further adjustments have been made to these consolidated financial results" (page 13). The parent's own note words it differently. It says CBP "has affirmed the Company position about not using the Chinese cell in the export of goods to USA over the period covered by investigation", while also highlighting "certain entries" that need further review (page 19). A fair reading has to hold both sentences. The auditors, in a limited review and not an audit, draw attention to "uncertainty related to the outcome of investigation" initiated by US Customs and Border Protection; they add "Our conclusion is not modified in respect of this matter" (\[RS\], review report, page 5). ## Where the margin went, as far as the statement shows The filings give no cause for the margin fall. They do give the lines, as a share of revenue (our arithmetic, consolidated, Q2 FY27 against Q2 FY26): - Materials consumed plus stock-in-trade purchases, adjusted for the change in inventories: 68.7% of revenue, against 61.4%. - Other manufacturing and project expenses: 5.3%, against 3.8%. - Sales, administration and other expenses: 5.8%, against 9.1%. Below EBITDA, depreciation was ₹347.26 crore against ₹239.76 crore, up 44.8%. Profit before tax fell ₹201.71 crore, to ₹1,029.75 crore from ₹1,231.46 crore: EBITDA accounts for ₹71.2 crore of that, depreciation ₹107.5 crore, finance costs ₹9.2 crore and other income ₹13.8 crore (our arithmetic). Capital work-in-progress stood at ₹7,578.33 crore at 30 September 2026, against ₹3,476.15 crore at 31 March 2026 (\[RS\], page 9). Our reading is that more of this will become depreciation as plants start; the filings do not forecast it. The consolidated segment table (\[RS\], page 12) shows Solar Photovoltaic Modules revenue of ₹6,571.01 crore against ₹5,369.34 crore and a segment result of ₹911.53 crore against ₹1,064.83 crore, a segment-result margin of 13.9% against 19.8% (our arithmetic; a segment result is not EBITDA, and the table does not say which segment holds the refund). Revenue growth was not even across the group. The parent's own (standalone) revenue was ₹4,577.55 crore in Q2, against ₹4,581.84 crore a year earlier, flat (our arithmetic). Consolidated revenue less standalone revenue was ₹2,940.2 crore, against ₹1,483.8 crore (our arithmetic, a gap that includes the subsidiaries, net of eliminations). A 55% stake in Associated Power Structures, for ₹1,225 crore, was completed on 18 June 2026 and consolidated from that date (\[RS\], Note 4). Its contribution is not given. ## The data-centre deal for ₹1 lakh The board also approved buying 100% of Waaree Green Data Centers and its two subsidiaries, Aurovault Data Centers and Sunstar Data Centers, from its own subsidiary Waaree Renewable Technologies, for ₹1,00,000 (₹1 lakh) in cash, for 10,000 shares, with completion indicated for financial year 2026-27; it is approved, not completed (\[RS\], Annexure A, page 2). It is a related-party transaction, which the company says is "done at arm's length basis"; it says Waaree Energies "is evaluating entering into the business of developing, owning and operating data centers". All three companies are "yet to commence operations", and two were incorporated in September 2026\. Waaree Green Data Centres is already named in the consolidated list of entities (\[RS\], page 7), as are Aurovault and Sunstar (page 8), so on our reading the purchase moves it within the group. The filings give no spending plan. ## Where this breaks The case against the thesis is serious. - **The margin fall does not depend on the refund.** If the refund is inside Operating EBITDA, taking it out makes the margin lower (13.6% to 17.8% for Q2, 16.0% for the half year, on the scenario above). The June quarter, which may or may not hold some of it, was already at 18.2%. - **The customs finding is open and has no stated amount.** The provision is ₹294.78 crore. The notice, the parent's note says, also affirms its position on Chinese cells. Whether the review ends with more, less or the same is not in the filings. - **Profit was flat for the half year at ₹1,645.5 crore against ₹1,651.1 crore (−0.3%, \[PR\]) on 47.3% more revenue.** The company's answer is operating leverage later: its chief executive, Mr. Jignesh Rathod, Whole Time Director & CEO, says the business sits "at the inflexion of becoming vertically and horizontally integrated with high operating leverage potential ahead, driven by increased utilization" (\[PR\]). That is a statement about the future, not a result. - **Our reading: cash flow flatters the picture.** The press release gives half-year operating cash flow of ₹3,483.6 crore against ₹574.7 crore. The cash flow statement shows ₹3,477.06 crore (\[RS\], page 11). A line of ₹2,359.63 crore for the increase in other current and non-current liabilities is the largest working-capital item; the filings do not say what those liabilities are. - **The sample is one quarter and one half-year.** The results are unaudited and reviewed, not audited. Seven subsidiaries' figures were not reviewed by their own auditors; management told the auditors they are "not material to the Group" (\[RS\], review report). A different treatment of one refund moves the answer. On the other side: order book of about ₹59,200 crore, cell production of 1.1 GW in Q2 against 0.6 GW a year earlier, and retail revenue of ₹5,753.0 crore in the half year against ₹1,976.8 crore (\[PR\]). None of it explains the margin, and the filings do not say that it should. ## Why it costs the reader something Anyone reading "EBITDA up 15.5% in the half year" is reading a number that, on the scenario above, is close to flat without an undated credit. The cost is misreading the quality of earnings: taking as operating growth what the notes may owe to a refund. This site cannot say how much of the refund is in which quarter, and nor can the filing. A reader who wants the clean margin has to ask the company that question. The MoatSCORE (provisional, first-pass) is 5.81 on our [Moat Screener](https://www.moatmarginresearch.com/moat-screener/); the company page is [Waaree Energies moat](https://www.moatmarginresearch.com/waaree-energies-moat/). A cost advantage in cells would be easiest to see in a margin that holds as output grows. These filings show the margin falling while cell output grew, and give no cell-level margin, so they neither confirm nor refute it. Waaree Renewable Technologies, the subsidiary the data-centre companies come from, was in our [19 October digest](https://www.moatmarginresearch.com/daily-filing-digest-2026-10-19/). ## Close: the ₹360.40 crore One line in one note, ₹360.40 crore, is 2.3% of the half year's revenue and 13.0% of its Operating EBITDA, if the scenario holds (our arithmetic). Next to it sits a customs finding with an ₹294.78 crore provision and no further adjustment. The questions to put to the company are the dull ones: which quarter, is it in Operating EBITDA, how much is cash, and what is the review's timetable. --- > Educational research, not investment advice. Every figure above is drawn from Waaree Energies' own filings, read from the primary documents on 28 October 2026; derived figures are our arithmetic, labelled as such. MoatSCORE read live from the Moat Screener on 28 October 2026 (provisional, first-pass). No buy/sell recommendations, no price targets, no share prices. Moat & Margin is not a SEBI-registered Research Analyst or Investment Adviser.