Sterlite Technologies Ltd

Mr. Sathia Jeeva Krishnan Chidambara appointed as a Non-executive Independent Director of the Company effective January 14, 2026 and as a Chairperson of Audit Committee effective from January 19, 2026

Mr. S. Madhavan ceased to be an Independent Director of the Company effective from close of business hours on January 19, 2026 pursuant to completion of his tenure.

Mr. S. Madhavan ceased to be an Independent Director of the Company effective from close of business hours on January 19, 2026 pursuant to completion of his tenure.

Mr. Sathia Jeeva Krishnan Chidambara appointed as a Non-executive Independent Director of the Company effective January 14, 2026 and as a Chairperson of Audit Committee effective from January 19, 2026

Mr. Ajay Jhanjhari, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, appointed as a Member of the Risk Management Committee w.e.f. May 22, 2025.

The case is linked with the main EOU matter.The department’s contention is that there is a 'procedural' lapse as use of RM has to be for 'intended purpose' and 'his factory'. The CESTAT has directed that the appeal be disposed of at present, with liberty granted to STL to take appropriate steps to revive the appeals and get the same heard once the main EOU matter is concluded by the Supreme Court. STL has lodged Writ Petition No. 523 of 2017, challenging the aforesaid Order of the CESTAT before the Bombay High Court. Writ petition filed before Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) has been withdrawn in terms of the Tribunal order dated 2 Sept 2016; STL had submitted a letter to the Tribunal for relisting of the appeal.During the recent hearing in respect of EOU main matter, the submissions made have been acknowledged by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and for legal validation, the matter has been referred to the Tribunal for further proceedings.

The Authorities have issued four separate Show Cause Notices to four different Service tax registrations of the Company (i.e. Waluj, Shendra, Odisha and closed unit of Waluj) demanding Service tax liability on difference between value of services appearing in 26AS vis-à-vis respective Service tax registrations. • STL has submitted detailed reply against these Show cause notices. Hearing is awaited from the Commissioner. The personal hearing was completed. Post completion of hearing, Order In Original is passed on 31.10.2023 and received on 6.11.2023 by dropping 2 SCNs raised on same PAN and partially dropping the 3rd SCN of INR 5.62 Cr. Now the order stands for 50.72Cr plus interest and penalty Order in Original for Droping of Service Tax Demand against order passed by Odisa Service tax authority has been passed, Now only one SCN has been open, against Such SCN Company has filed writ petition with bombay HC.

As per the company policy, STL has claimed ESOP expenditures as debited to P & L Account.The said expense represents the option discount i.e. excess of market price of the share at the grant date of the option. STL has submitted that the amount written off is as required by the SEBI guidelines and hence, entire expenditure need to be allowed as deduction. The AO disallowed the same stating that the Assessee company has failed to bring on record the actual number of options exercised by the employees. In view of the fact, said expenditure has not been crystallized in the previous year, and the said expenditure is contingent, notional and more over capital in nature, and hence, the claim of the Assessee is rejected. The company has filed appeals before CIT (A) and Mumbai High Court. AY 2001-02, AY 2008-09 & AY 2009-10 Pending before Bombay HC. AY 2016-17 and AY 2021-22 Pending before ITAT. Balance cases are Pending before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Date of intiation of the litigation is different for every assessment year, the same are mentioned below: AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 - 04-08-2017 AY 2001-02 - 16-11-2007 AY 2014-15 - 19-02-2018 AY 2015-16- 23-01-2018 AY 2016-17 - 15-01-2019 (CIT(A)) and 08-02-2024 for ITAT AY 2017-18 - 14-01-2020 AY 2018-19 - 25-03-2021 AY 2020-21 - 28-10-2022 AY 2021-22 - 26-12-2024 (ITAT). AY 2001-02, AY 2008-09 & AY 2009-10 Pending before Bombay HC. AY 2016-17 and AY 2021-22 Pending before ITAT. Balance cases are Pending before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 1. Appeal filed for AY 2009-10 has been disposed off by the high court 2. Appeal filed for AY 2016-17 We have received Favourable order from ITAT 3. For other years no change in the status

The redemption fine under the Customs Act, has been imposed by the Tribunal towards violation of condition of Notification No. 53/97-Cus as the said capital goods have been used by DTA unit. STL has filed Special Leave Petition against High Court order and Civil Appeal against CESTAT order. The Supreme Court has noted that the Departmental Appeal against CESTAT order is still pending before the High Court. The Supreme Court, while disposing of the Special Leave Petition of STL, directed that the records of the Departmental Appeal be transferred to the Supreme Court. During the hearing the Bench framed specific questions for determination on the basis of the submissions made. In the meanwhile, STL had filed an appeal withdrawal application to the extent of Excise matters by opting Sabka Vikas Legacy Dispute Resolution scheme. And for applicability of the said scheme to STL case, the said application was taken up for hearing on 9 Sept 2020 and partial withdrawal was allowed. Hence, the appeal before Supreme Court is limited to the redemption fine imposed under the Customs Act. The Supreme Court has remanded the matter to Bombay High Court . The Appeal is pending with Hon'ble Bombay High Court and waiting for hearing.

Basis the investigation carried out by Directorate General of Intelligence (“DGGI”), show cause notice was issued to the Company demanding GST on account of non-inclusion of management salary cost while raising invoices on distinct persons qua support services provided by the corporate office. At the investigation stage, there were mixed views regarding applicability of GST on employee cost based on the Appellate Advance Rulings passed in the matter of Columbia Asia Hospitals Private Limited as well as Cummins India Limited. Thus, the demand raised by the Authorities of INR 21.51 Crs was already paid by the Company before issuance of Show Cause notice (“SCN”). However, pursuant to issuance of SCN, the underlying issue of inclusion of employee cost while raising invoices qua cross charge has been clarified by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (“CBIC”) vide Circular No. 199/11/2023-GST dated July 17, 2023 (“Circular”). The said Circular has clearly clarified that employee cost of the Head office is not mandatorily required to be included while computing the taxable value for cross charge, even in cases where full input tax credit is not available to the concerned branch offices. It is settled position that circulars issued by the CBIC, are binding the Authorities. Accordingly, in terms of the said Circular, the Company has good case on merits. In any event, it is settled position in law that in case of interpretational issue, penalty cannot be levied. Given the above, the Company has good case on merits. The Company will either file an appeal against the Order confirming demand or will file a writ petition before the High Court.

The officer has passed an order confirming the demand of INR 5.50 Cr on the basis of the difference in taxable value appearing in GSTR-7 (i.e. GST TDS certificate) and GSTR-3B and non-reversal of excess TDS credit claimed by Rs 0.29 Cr along with interest and penalty. The Company is in the process of filing an appeal/writ petition against the said order.

Demand Order having DIN ITBA/AST/S/156/2025-26/1084278320(1), issued under section 143(3) r.w.s 144C(13) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated December 31, 2025 of INR 36.83 Crores. This is rergarding adjustments related to intra-group services like Marketing/HR/administrative/ software development services from various overseas related parties, Interest on Loans and Advances, Corporate Guarantee and Recovery of SBLC Fees, and Interest on Outstanding Receivables.

Demand of GST on excess availment of ITC under wrong head and interest on reversal of ITC. INR 07.69 Cr on the basis of the Excess Claim and Wrong Reclaim of ITC in GSTR-3B Interest on Reversals along with interest and penalty INR 4,10,83,372/-