ET NEWS

Even though alcoholic liquor for human consumption remains outside the ambit of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the latest wave of tax reforms is quietly reshaping the industry, Campari Group (India) Managing Director Shivam Misra said. The second phase of GST reform -- dubbed GST 2.0 -- has brought much-needed clarity and predictability to the sector’s complex value chain, Misra told ToI's Saurabh Sinha. Misra said the new framework has simplified rate structures across upstream and allied services that support the alcohol industry. “For route-to-market, this translates into cleaner invoices, fewer classification disputes and less friction in transport and multimodal logistics,” he explained.In other words, while liquor itself remains taxed at the state level, the ecosystem that surrounds it -- covering logistics, warehousing and related services -- now benefits from a more streamlined national tax regime. A crucial precursor to these changes was introduced last year. From November 1, 2024, extra neutral alcohol (ENA) -- a key input in the production of potable spirits -- was excluded from GST. The move prevented federal levies from being added to state duties, which had previously resulted in a “tax-on-tax” burden. This structural correction, Misra said, has reduced working capital blockages and improved cost efficiency across the supply chain. Together, the ENA exemption and GST 2.0’s rationalised rate structure have created a more predictable compliance environment. “They free up working capital and create a more predictable compliance environment,” Misra noted, highlighting that reduced ambiguity on transport and job-work services -- now typically charged at 5% with conditions -- has helped streamline operations. The reforms are also aligning with India’s recent free trade agreements (FTAs), but Misra dismissed the notion that lower tariffs would trigger a sudden surge of foreign liquor into India. “Supply is structurally paced by Scotch’s minimum three-year maturation cycle and allocations across over 180 global markets,” he said.“What we are more likely to see is steady premiumisation and a clearer value ladder, not sudden distortion,” he observed. With alcohol continuing to be a state subject, local governments maintain authority over value-added tax (VAT) and excise duties. As a result, the impact of GST-related improvements varies across the country. “Recent developments have been mixed,” Misra said.“Maharashtra, for instance, raised VAT on liquor to 10% and increased certain fees for FY26, while other states are reviewing frameworks to curb cascading and cross-border arbitrage,” he pointed out. He noted that any reductions in state-level levies remain jurisdiction-specific and depend on individual government notifications. Where such calibrations occur, they tend to improve compliance and consumer protection, creating a more stable operating environment for companies and distributors alike. For the wider ecosystem, the GST and trade reforms have collectively introduced greater transparency and operational efficiency. Consumers, Misra said, now face a more rational and visible tax structure on upstream services, while producers benefit from tariff pathways that make international spirits more accessible without encouraging excessive consumption. “For the value chain, there is lower cascading and clarified logistics and job-work rates meaning cleaner billing, reduced frictional costs, and more efficient operations,” he explained.“And for ‘Make in India’, qualifying bulk under FTAs and permitted blending elevates domestic quality and strengthens premium IMFL offerings, bridging to bottled-in-origin,” Misra said.

JSW Energy shares slipped over 5% to Rs 514.15 on the BSE in early trade on Monday after the company reported a 17% YoY decline in consolidated net profit to Rs 705 crore for Q2 FY26, compared with Rs 853 crore a year ago.Revenue from operations, however, rose 60% YoY to Rs 5,177 crore, driven by higher renewable capacity additions and contributions from the Mahanadi and O2 Power projects.Sequentially, profit after tax (PAT) declined 5% from Rs 743 crore in Q1 FY26, while revenue edged up 0.7% from Rs 5,143 crore.On the operational front, EBITDA surged 67% YoY to Rs 3,180 crore, supported by organic renewable additions. For H1 FY26, EBITDA jumped 79% YoY to Rs 6,237 crore.The company said its balance sheet remains healthy, with a net debt-to-equity ratio of 2.1x, and it is likely to continue pursuing growth opportunities in renewables.Here’s what analysts say investors should do now:ICICI Securities – Buy | Target price: Rs 700ICICI Securities noted that JSW Energy reported a 78% YoY jump in operating profit to Rs 30,000 crore in Q2 FY26, driven by acquisitions of O2 Power, the Mahanadi thermal plant, and new renewable assets. However, net profit declined due to higher interest costs, depreciation, and lower profits at certain plants.The company has converted 40% of its capacity into long-term PPAs and is expanding further with a 150MW hydro project and the GE Power asset acquisition. Locked-in EBITDA has surged to Rs 36,000 crore (vs Rs 5,200 crore in FY25), supporting a strong >25% operating profit CAGR forecast from FY25–FY32E.JM Financial – Buy | Target price: Rs 697JM Financial highlighted that JSW Energy posted net revenue of Rs 5,180 crore, a 60% YoY increase, driven by 52% growth in organic renewable generation and recent acquisitions such as O2 Power and KSK Mahanadi. Average realizations rose to Rs 3.5/kWh, while EBITDA came in at Rs 3,000 crore, up 78% YoY. Adjusted PAT, however, declined 17% YoY to Rs 700 crore due to higher depreciation and interest costs.The company has 30.5 GW of total generation capacity (13.2 GW operational), with 4.6 GW under construction. It also boasts 29.4 GWh of energy storage, including pumped hydro and battery systems. JSW Energy’s long-term target is 30 GW by 2030, supported by improving margins and strong capital discipline.Also read: RIL shares surge 3% as Q2 profit rises 10% YoY. Should you buy, sell or hold?(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)