Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM67956
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-7
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Mangement
Lovely professional university
Mangement
Lovely professional university
Mangement
Lovely professional university
Mangement
Lovely professional university
Mangement
Lovely professional university
This paper studies financial performance, corporate governance, agency problems and business ethics at Exide Industries Limited over FY2020–21 to FY2024–25. Exide is a relevant Unit I case because its battery business combines manufacturing risk, lead sourcing and recycling, energy-transition exposure, product responsibility, safety obligations and a substantial public shareholder base. The study uses a documentary, longitudinal case-study approach based on Exide’s integrated annual reports, audited financial statements, corporate-governance report, BRSR, CSR disclosures, statutory material and a peer benchmark with Amara Raja Energy & Mobility Limited. Exide’s standalone sales increased from ₹10,041 crore in FY2020–21 to ₹16,588 crore in FY2024–25, while operating profit rose from ₹1,356 crore to ₹1,893 crore. The sales endpoint CAGR was 13.37%; operating-profit CAGR was 8.70%. In FY2024–25 the company reported an 11.4% operating margin, 6.49% net margin, 1.51 current ratio and 0.03 debt-equity ratio. The governance profile showed four independent directors out of seven (57.14%) and promoter holding of 45.99%. The study concludes that Exide has strong formal processes and a conservative balance sheet, while Board-level transparency should focus more on capital allocation, technology transition, related-party oversight and measurable remediation.
KEYWORDS
Exide’s five-year evidence supports a balanced assessment. The company expanded sales and operating profit, maintained a conservative financial structure and more than doubled net worth. Yet sales growth did not translate proportionately into operating-profit growth, and FY2021–22 net profit was distorted by an exceptional merger item. The governance architecture is substantial—majority-independent Board profile, independent committee chairs, clean audits, ERM, whistle-blower access, POSH mechanisms and BRSR Core reasonable assurance. These features reduce information and control risk but do not by themselves establish that every investment decision was effectively challenged. The most material governance questions are forward-looking and outcome-based: capital allocation between the lead-acid core and new-energy opportunities, documented completion of the unspent CSR project, transparent related-party review, and clearer circularity reporting boundaries. Exide’s governance quality will ultimately be demonstrated not only by policies and committees but by measurable challenge, remediation and stakeholder results.
l Amara Raja Energy & Mobility Limited. (2025). Integrated annual report 2024–25. https://www.amararaja.com l Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. l Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. P. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1–2), 81–112. l Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing. l Exide Industries Limited. (2025). Integrated annual report 2024–25. https://www.exideindustries.com l Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(2), 301–325. l Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman. l Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. l Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (2000). Is group affiliation profitable in emerging markets? An analysis of diversified Indian business groups. Journal of Finance, 55(2), 867–891. l La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471–517.
Publication Date
10/14/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
2
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
5
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...