---

       T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                     A S I A   P A C I F I C

          Friday, April 4, 2025, Vol. 28, No. 68

                           Headlines



A U S T R A L I A

INFRABUILD AUSTRALIA: Fitch Lowers LongTerm IDR to 'CC'
INFRABUILD AUSTRALIA: Reshuffles Debts to Hold Off Default
KENTEL AUSTRALASIA: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
RED HOT: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 8
RESIMAC BASTILLE 2025-1NC: Moody's Gives B2 Rating to Cl. F Notes

ROBERTSON COATINGS: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 10
SATELITE AND SATENAV: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 15
SHIFT OVERDRAFT 2025-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Cl. E Notes
STRONGROOM AI: Administrators Seek Sale as Court Order Hits Assets
STRONGROOM AI: EVP Claims Founder Admitted to Fraud, Faked Accounts

TEKTORCH SOLUTIONS: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 10


C H I N A

GUANGZHOU R&F: Court Dismisses Winding-up Bids vs Subsidiaries
GUANGZHOU R&F: Sells Most of Its Overseas Assets
HO WAN KWOK: Default Judgment Against Lamp Entities Affirmed
HOPSON DEVELOPMENT: Fitch Lowers LT Foreign Currency IDR to 'CCC-'
HOPSON DEVELOPMENT: S&P Cuts ICR to 'CCC' On Non-payment Risk

WILL'S GROUP: Collapse Leaves Members Stranded, Staff Unpaid


I N D I A

3GR AGRO: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
AMEYA PRECISION: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
BARUA POLYMERS: CRISIL Moves B+ Debt Rating to Not Cooperating
CHANDRIKA POWER: CRISIL Assigns B+ Rating to INR66.7cr Term Loan
KORRUN INDIA: CRISIL Keeps B Corporate Credit Rating

MA SHANTIMOYEE: CRISIL Cuts Long/Short Term Debt Ratings to D
MAHARASHTRA ALUMINIUM: CRISIL Reaffirms B Rating on Cash Loan
NITIN FIRE: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
PC JEWELLER: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
REKHA INDUSTRIES: CRISIL Assigns B Rating to INR2.24cr LT Loan

SARIDENA CONSTRUCTIONS: CRISIL Assigns B+ Rating to INR95cr Loan
SUSEE PREMIUM: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
SWASTIK ISPAT: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
TACTIVE SOFTWARE: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
TILAK EXPORTS: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating

TIRUPATI BALAJI: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
TRISHA TRENDS: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
UNITED TECHNOMECH: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
V. R. GHUGE: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
VENKATESHWARA SHIKSHAN: CRISIL Keeps D Ratings in Not Cooperating

VIJAYLAXMI GINNING: CRISIL Keeps B Ratings in Not Cooperating
VISHWAKARMA AUTOMOTIVE: CRISIL Keeps B+ Rating in Not Cooperating
VNR EXPORTS: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
VSRK CONSTRUCTIONS: CRISIL Keeps D Ratings in Not Cooperating


M A L A Y S I A

SAPURA ENERGY: Not Likely to Exit PN17 Anytime Soon


N E W   Z E A L A N D

BODY SHOP: 70 Employees Left Without Jobs as Company Liquidates
KIND & GENTLE: Court to Hear Wind-Up Petition on May 9
MAP TRANSPORT: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on May 4
MERECO LIMITED: Court to Hear Wind-Up Petition on April 7
PLASTERING & SERVICES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 27

SCRUBZ CLEANING: Khov Jones Appointed as Receivers


S I N G A P O R E

BAMBOO CAPITAL: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28
FIREMANE PTE: Commences Wind-Up Proceedings
GEM HOMES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28
HARDY AMIES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 29
LCM PTE: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28

PUMA ENERGY: Fitch Affirms 'BB' LongTerm IDR, Outlook Stable

                           - - - - -


=================
A U S T R A L I A
=================

INFRABUILD AUSTRALIA: Fitch Lowers LongTerm IDR to 'CC'
-------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded the Long-Term Issuer Default Rating
(IDR) of InfraBuild Australia Pty Ltd. (InfraBuild) to 'CC', from
'CCC-'. The rating on InfraBuild's senior secured US dollar notes
has also been downgraded to 'CCC-', from 'CCC+', with a Recovery
Rating of 'RR3'. Fitch rates InfraBuild based on the consolidated
profile of its 100% holding company, Liberty InfraBuild Ltd.
(InfraBuild Group), which does not generate any revenue, nor holds
any cash or debt.

The rating downgrade is based on its assessment of an elevated
probability of default by InfraBuild on its USD550 million notes
within the next three months as the company has not yet published
its audited financial statements for the financial year ended June
2024 (FY24). The company expects the audit process to be completed
after its parent, GFG Alliance, reaches a formal settlement with
creditors of Greensill Capital.

Fitch believes completion of the audit would also require
InfraBuild's directors to approve the distribution sought by GFG
Alliance for the settlement, and certainty over the refinancing of
InfraBuild's USD150 million (AUD240 million) asset-backed term loan
(ABTL) due May 2026. Fitch thinks these conditions are difficult to
meet in a timely manner.

Fitch also sees risk of a covenant breach under the ABTL within the
next six months, unless InfraBuild's EBITDA recovers. A covenant
breach, if not waived, could lead to payment acceleration and a
liquidity crunch. Fitch sees limited potential for EBITDA
improvement in the next six months due to the risk of an increase
in cheap steel imports into Australia. The weak EBITDA outlook may
also hamper the ABTL's refinancing.

Key Rating Drivers

High Risk of Bond Default: Fitch understands that InfraBuild is
discussing with senior secured noteholders to allow a deferral of
the publication of the FY24 audited financial statements.
Bondholders had provided their consent to defer the publication
until 31 January 2025 and subsequently to March 2025, from
end-October 2024.

An agreement may not be reached with the majority of noteholders to
extend the timeframe for audited statements beyond 31 March 2025.
That would lead to an event of default under the notes and
principal acceleration. Even if the noteholders agree, Fitch thinks
they may require the statements to be available within the next
three months. Fitch sees impediments to the timely completion of
InfraBuild's audit process, which means a default under the notes
could be imminent.

Weak EBITDA Outlook: InfraBuild's 1HFY25 reported EBITDA fell 43%
yoy. Fitch sees risk that performance in the next few quarters will
remain weak due to a surge in steel imports into Australia. The US
imposed a 25% import tariff from March 2025 and the EU is planning
to cut import quotas to address the risk of steel being dumped in
the region. Australia has not imposed protectionist measures so
far, beyond existing anti-dumping duties and product certification
requirements. Australia's steel imports could increase due to
redirection of flows from North Asia.

ESG - Financial Transparency: Fitch thinks the publication of FY24
audited financial statements may be delayed beyond the next few
months, leading to a default on InfraBuild's notes. Fitch relys on
unaudited FY24 accounts for its forecasts, and InfraBuild's actual
financial position could be weaker.

Risk of Covenant Breach: Fitch estimates InfraBuild would breach
the ABTL's financial covenants by 1QFY26 in the absence of a sharp
EBITDA recovery, which could lead to a second waiver request
following the October 2024 covenant reset. An uncured breach and
inability to refinance could lead to an acceleration of USD150
million under the ABTL and a liquidity shortfall.

High Refinancing Risk: InfraBuild is working to refinance the ABTL
within the next few months, to complete the audit process for FY24
financials and avert a bond default. The company is engaging with
new investors in addition to the existing lenders, BlackRock and
Silver Point Finance. Fitch thinks the weak EBITDA outlook will
hamper the refinancing process and it may not be completed in
time.

Settlement-Related Uncertainty: The potential amount payable by GFG
Alliance to settle its dues with creditors is unclear. The ABTL
permits an initial release of USD250 million, and any additional
amount will require approval from lenders. Fitch thinks
InfraBuild's directors may also withhold approval for a higher
distribution to GFG Alliance for the settlement, as it would
undermine InfraBuild's liquidity. Fitch assumes InfraBuild will pay
a dividend of USD250 million in FY25.

Potential Asset Sales: InfraBuild is pursuing asset sales in the US
and Australia, which would improve its liquidity and boost its
covenant ratios. Substantial disposal gains may lead us to revise
up its liquidity assessment for InfraBuild and boost its credit
profile. However, the company has pushed back the timeframe for the
receipt of potential sale proceeds of around AUD75 million to
4QFY25 from 3QFY25, and Fitch has not included them in its forecast
due to uncertainty.

Limited Impact from Whyalla: InfraBuild generally buys around
400,000 tonnes of steel billets annually from Whyalla Steelworks in
South Australia, which was owned by GFG Alliance until February
2025, when the state government forced it under administration.

Media reports suggest that the administrator is seeking a price
hike for billet supply to InfraBuild, which has the option to
import instead. Fitch estimates the annual EBITDA impact of a
potential reset of pricing for Whyalla supply or its substitution
by imports at less than AUD20 million.

ESG - Governance Structure: Fitch thinks InfraBuild's credit
profile is exposed to governance risks. The ownership of InfraBuild
is concentrated with the GFG Alliance, which has been unable to
reach a debt settlement since 2021. GFG's Whyalla asset was forced
into administration, and the group is being investigated by the
UK's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) for suspected fraud and money
laundering. InfraBuild has a record of related-party transactions.
Its board of directors has only three independent members out of
seven.

Rated on a Standalone Basis: InfraBuild's ultimate controlling
party as per its financial statements is Singapore-incorporated
Liberty Steel Group Holdings Pte. Ltd (LSGH), which is part of the
larger GFG Alliance. Fitch does not have any material information
on LSGH and its shareholders, preventing a detailed parent and
subsidiary linkage assessment. However, Fitch thinks risks
associated with a cash drain from InfraBuild for the benefit of the
GFG Alliance beyond its dividend assumption are mitigated by
InfraBuild's debt covenants.

Peer Analysis

InfraBuild's IDR reflects its assessment that a default is
probable. The IDR can be compared with that of peers such as
Interpipe Holdings Plc (CCC-), Metinvest B.V. (CCC) and
Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (Cliffs, BB-/Stable).

Interpipe is a Ukrainian producer of high value-added steel
products, mostly pipes and railway wheels. Interpipe's rating
reflects the high risk of damage or disruption at its facilities in
central Ukraine, which generate substantially all its earnings and
cash flow, due to their proximity to the conflict zone.
Nonetheless, Fitch expects the company to be able to maintain
robust liquidity in the near term to fund operations and service
its financial obligations in 2025. InfraBuild's lower IDR reflects
its assessment of higher short-term liquidity risk compared with
Interpipe.

Metinvest is a vertically integrated Ukrainian mining and steel
company, with most of its operations in Ukraine. Its rating
reflects heightened operational and financial risk since Russia's
invasion of Ukraine. The IDR also incorporates Fitch's view that
Metinvest is likely to service its financial obligations in 2025
with the help of its overseas assets. Metinvest is rated higher
than InfraBuild based on its assessment of lower short-term
liquidity risk.

Cliffs are the largest flat-rolled steel producer and largest
producer of iron ore pellets in North America. It is a majority
blast furnace producer of steel with some electric arc furnace
(EAF) production. Its business profile is stronger than
InfraBuild's due to a much larger EBITDA scale, focus on higher
value-added products and a significant share of fixed-price
contracts. Fitch also expects Cliffs' leverage and coverage metrics
to be healthier.

Key Assumptions

Fitch's Key Assumptions Within Its Rating Case for InfraBuild
Group:

- Revenue to decline by 13% in FY24 and 6% in FY25 before
recovering by 4% in FY26;

- Average Fitch-adjusted EBITDA margin of 4% over FY24-FY26 (FY23:
10%);

- Cumulative capex of around AUD350 million during FY24-FY26;

- A special dividend of USD250 million in FY25;

- Release of USD100 million of restricted cash held in escrow under
the ABTL;

- Repayment of USD150 million of outstanding ABTL in FY26;

- No divestments or acquisitions.

Recovery Analysis

The recovery analysis assumes that InfraBuild would be liquidated
in a bankruptcy as Fitch estimates this results in a better return
to creditors. Fitch has assumed a 10% administrative claim.

Liquidation Approach

- To calculate the liquidation value, Fitch uses a 70% advance rate
against InfraBuild's reported trade receivables as of end-December
2024 and a 40% rate against the reported inventories and property,
plant and equipment. Fitch has lowered the advance rates to account
for risk that InfraBuild's reported values could be adjusted lower
upon audit.

- Fitch treats the outstanding ABTL and Mayfield mortgage as senior
to the notes in the recovery waterfall.

These assumptions result in an 'RR3' Recovery Rating.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade:

- The IDR would be downgraded to 'C' if a default or default-like
event begins. This includes InfraBuild entering into a grace or
cure period following non-payment of a material financial
obligation.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade:

- Reduced debt acceleration and liquidity risk, driven by the
publication of audited statements for FY24 in a timely manner.

Liquidity and Debt Structure

InfraBuild reported unrestricted cash of AUD288 million as of
end-December 2024, which is insufficient to address the potential
payment acceleration of USD550 million (AUD880 million) in senior
secured notes within the next three months.

If InfraBuild averts a default on its notes, Fitch estimates that
its FYE25 cash of around AUD330 million could be insufficient to
repay the USD150 million ABTL in FY26 due to negative free cash
flow. InfraBuild's AUD50 million Mayfield mortgage matures in
October 2025 and an AUD72 million related-party loan may be
repayable after the ABTL is repaid.

Issuer Profile

InfraBuild is Australia's sole vertically integrated manufacturer,
processor and distributor of long steel products, including
reinforcing steel, with an EAF-based steelmaking capacity of 1.4
million tonnes per annum. It comprises the manufacturing, product
mill, distribution and recycling assets of the former Arrium Group,
which were taken over by GFG Alliance in 2017.

REFERENCES FOR SUBSTANTIALLY MATERIAL SOURCE CITED AS KEY DRIVER OF
RATING

Fitch rates InfraBuild on a standalone basis. Its ultimate
controlling party is LSGH. Fitch does not have any material
information on LSGH and its shareholders, and therefore cannot
undertake a detailed parent and subsidiary linkage assessment.
However, Fitch thinks risks associated with a cash drain from
InfraBuild for the benefit of the GFG Alliance beyond its dividend
assumption are mitigated by InfraBuild's debt covenants. This
provides us with sufficient basis to assess InfraBuild's credit
profile and assign a rating.

MACROECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS AND SECTOR FORECASTS

Fitch's latest quarterly Global Corporates Macro and Sector
Forecasts data file which aggregates key data points used in its
credit analysis. Fitch's macroeconomic forecasts, commodity price
assumptions, default rate forecasts, sector key performance
indicators and sector-level forecasts are among the data items
included.

ESG Considerations

InfraBuild has an ESG Relevance Score of '5' for Financial
Transparency due to the continued non-availability of audited FY24
financial statements. If the audit process is not completed within
the next few months, InfraBuild is likely to face an event of
default and debt acceleration. Fitch has relied on unaudited
accounts for its forecasts and InfraBuild's actual financial
position could be weaker. These factors have a negative impact on
the credit profile and are highly relevant to the rating, resulting
in a lower IDR for InfraBuild.

InfraBuild has an ESG Relevance Score of '5' for Governance
Structure due to ownership by entities within Sanjeev Gupta's GFG
Alliance, which has been unable to reach a debt settlement since
2021 and is under investigation by the SFO. InfraBuild also lacks a
majority of independent directors on its board. These have a
negative impact on the credit profile and are highly relevant to
the rating, resulting in a lower IDR for InfraBuild.

InfraBuild has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Group Structure
due to it being part of the complex GFG Alliance and numerous
related-party transactions. This has a negative impact on the
credit profile and is relevant to the ratings in conjunction with
other factors.

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

   Entity/Debt             Rating           Recovery   Prior
   -----------             ------           --------   -----
InfraBuild
Australia Pty Ltd.   LT IDR CC   Downgrade             CCC-

   senior secured    LT     CCC- Downgrade    RR3      CCC+

INFRABUILD AUSTRALIA: Reshuffles Debts to Hold Off Default
----------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Financial Review reports that Sanjeev Gupta's
InfraBuild said it has won a reprieve from bondholders who will
lend the steel-making business another US$150 million (AUD240
million) it can use to pay back other debts that are due next
year.

The Financial Review relates that the company also said that it had
been granted permission to delay the release of its audited
accounts for the financial year ending June 30 last year - it has
already delayed their release five times – until May 31.

According to the Financial Review, the new debt from bondholders
comes days after Fitch Ratings downgraded the company's credit
rating and warned a default "appears probable" because losses were
rising as debts fell due.

InfraBuild is the most profitable part of Gupta's embattled GFG
Alliance empire. The business once stretched from the United
Kingdom to the United States. In Australia, it owned not only
InfraBuild but also the Whyalla steelworks, which was forced into
administration in February.

GFG owes some AUD5 billion and has been scrambling to cut a deal
with creditors after the collapse four years ago of its major
financier, Greensill, the Financial Review notes. Some bondholders,
including FitzWalter Capital, a private equity firm run by former
Macquarie deal maker Ben Brazil, have been concerned money from
InfraBuild will be used to pay off Gupta's broader debts.

Earlier this week, Fitch analysts said there was an "elevated
probability of default by InfraBuild" on US$550 million in debts
within months, particularly if bondholders did not agree to a
reprieve.

On March 27, in comments circulated by InfraBuild, a spokesman for
some of the bondholders said they remained "supportive of the
shareholder's vision for the company and have confidence in the
management".

"We're pleased to work together for a successful outcome that
enhances the credit profile and liquidity of the business.
InfraBuild is a market leader, with a strong management team and
board - which is well positioned to capture future growth alongside
their end markets," he said.

According to the Financial Review, InfraBuild chief executive
Francisco Irazusta said the agreement with its lenders "signifies
the robustness and value of InfraBuild providing additional
liquidity and strengthening our balance sheet which will allow us
to focus on continuing to deliver high quality steel products".

"Despite the challenging global operating environment, InfraBuild
continues to invest through the cycle and deliver on its long-term
strategy focusing on sustainability-driven product and service
innovations, digitisation, improving operational efficiencies,
maintaining cost discipline and enhancing our customer offerings
for an expected market recovery."

InfraBuild and the Whyalla steelworks were purchased by Gupta in
2017 out of the collapse of Arrium, the ASX-listed business that
had originally been spun out of BHP as OneSteel, for AUD700
million. InfraBuild runs two electric arc furnaces in Sydney and
Melbourne, 10 manufacturing mills, and a network of steel
distribution sites and recycling operations.

Fitch had warned that even if InfraBuild averts a default by
releasing audited full-year accounts with the agreement of
bondholders, it would struggle to pay the US$150 million due in May
next year given it had cash of about AUD330 million, a buffer which
was falling due to weaker earnings, the Financial Review relays.

The Financial Review says the new agreement means that those debts
will be paid, and the bondholders will have security over all the
company's assets.

Unaudited half-year accounts obtained by The Australian Financial
Review in March showed InfraBuild fell to a loss of AUD81.3 million
compared with a AUD40 million profit after tax in the first half of
the last financial year.

Over the past four years, InfraBuild has spent about AUD130 million
on what it describes as restructuring and professional fees "in
relation to specific non-recurring, non-operational matters", which
are likely to be connected to GFG and its settlement with the
Greensill creditors, adds the Financial Review.

                         About InfraBuild

InfraBuild is Australia's largest and only vertically integrated
electric arc furnace manufacturer and supplier of steel long
products. The company supplies around 2.1 million tonnes per annum
(mtpa) of steel long products across Australia, with most products
supplying the construction steel segment of the market (rebar,
mesh, etc.).

InfraBuild is a private company and is ultimately owned by the GFG
Alliance, a UK-based international industrial, energy, natural
resources and financial services group.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific in
mid-February 2025, Moody's Ratings has downgraded InfraBuild
Australia Pty Ltd's corporate family rating and backed senior
secured notes rating to Caa2 from Caa1, and maintained the negative
outlook.

The ratings downgrade reflects InfraBuild's rising default risk
given the company's weakening liquidity profile and deteriorating
operating performance, which continue to track below Moody's
expectations. Moody's view the company's capital structure as
unsustainable given its materially high interest burden, which
along with its decline in earnings, will result in ongoing cash
burn over the next 12-18 months. Without a material improvement in
earnings, Moody's expect that InfraBuild will breach its financial
covenants under its asset-backed term loan (ABTL) facility as they
reset in the first half of the fiscal year ending June 2026 (fiscal
2026), and will require waivers or further amendments. 2026), and
will require waivers or further amendments.


KENTEL AUSTRALASIA: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
------------------------------------------------------------
A first meeting of the creditors in the proceedings of Kentel
Australasia Pty Ltd will be held on April 7, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. via
virtual meeting.

Quentin Olde and Liam Healey of Ankura were appointed as
administrators of the company on March 27, 2025.


RED HOT: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 8
-------------------------------------------------
A first meeting of the creditors in the proceedings of Red Hot Fire
Protection Pty Ltd will be held on April 8, 2025 at 12:30 p.m. by
teleconference and video conference only.

Aaron Kevin Lucan of Worrells was appointed as administrator of the
company on March 27, 2025.


RESIMAC BASTILLE 2025-1NC: Moody's Gives B2 Rating to Cl. F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned the following definitive ratings to
the notes issued by Perpetual Trustee Company Limited as trustee of
the RESIMAC Bastille Trust in respect of the RESIMAC Series
2025-1NC.

Issuer: Perpetual Trustee Company Limited as trustee of the RESIMAC
Bastille Trust in respect of the RESIMAC Series 2025-1NC

AUD875.0 million Class A Notes, Assigned Aaa (sf)

AUD25.0 million Class AB Notes, Assigned Aaa (sf)

AUD50.0 million Class B Notes, Assigned Aa2 (sf)

AUD12.0 million Class C Notes, Assigned A2 (sf)

AUD13.0 million Class D Notes, Assigned Baa2 (sf)

AUD10.50 million Class E Notes, Assigned Ba2 (sf)

AUD7.0 million Class F Notes, Assigned B2 (sf)

The AUD7.50 million Class G Notes are not rated by us.

The transaction is a securitisation of first-ranking mortgage loans
secured over residential properties located in Australia. The loans
were originated and are serviced by Resimac Limited (RESIMAC,
unrated).

RESIMAC is an Australian non-bank lender, specialising in
non-conforming and prime residential mortgage lending. In 2020,
RESIMAC expanded its lending into asset finance, providing auto and
equipment loans to commercial and consumer obligors. As of December
31, 2024, RESIMAC's Australian mortgage portfolio was around
AUD14.2 billion.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The definitive ratings take into account, among other factors, an
evaluation of the underlying receivables and their expected
performance, evaluation of the capital structure and credit
enhancement provided to the notes, availability of excess spread
over the life of the transaction, the liquidity facility in the
amount of 1.5% of the rated notes balance, the legal structure, the
experience of RESIMAC as servicer and the presence of Perpetual
Trustee Company Limited as the backup servicer.

Moody’s MILAN Stressed Loss — representing the loss that
Moody's expects the portfolio to suffer in the event of a severe
recession scenario — is 8.0%. Moody's expected loss for this
transaction is 1.1%.

According to Moody's analysis, the Class A Notes benefit from 12.5%
subordination, compared with the 8.0% MILAN Stressed Loss. The
transaction challenges include a relatively high proportion of
loans to self-employed borrowers at 70.8% and further 10.4% of
loans to company borrowers.

Transactional features are as follows:

-- Initially, principal payments will be made sequentially,
starting with the Class A Notes. All classes of notes, excluding
Class G and Class Z Notes, will start receiving their pro-rata
share of principal, provided that step-down test is met. The step
down conditions include, among others, no unreimbursed charge-offs
and the subordination to the Class AB Notes at least doubling since
closing.

-- Under the retention mechanism, prior to the call date, a
certain proportion of excess spread remaining after reimbursement
of losses and carry-over charge-offs will be used to repay
principal on the junior notes, starting with the Class F Notes,
thereby limiting their exposure to losses. Issuance of an
equivalent amount of subordinated Class Z Notes at the same time
will preserve the level of credit enhancement available to the more
senior ranking notes.

-- The servicer is required to maintain the weighted average
interest rates on the mortgage loans at a level sufficient for the
trust to meet the required payments when due, plus 0.25%.

Other pool features are as follows:

-- The pool has a weighted average scheduled LTV of 72.5%.

-- The pool has a weighted average seasoning of 11.0 months.

-- Alternative documentation loans make up around 92.5% of the
pool.

-- The pool has a relatively high exposure to Gold Coast,
Queensland (5.6%).

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Residential
Mortgage-Backed Securitizations" published in October 2024.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could lead
to an upgrade of the ratings. Moody's current expectations of loss
could be better than its original expectations because of fewer
defaults by underlying obligors or higher recoveries on defaulted
loans. The Australian job and the housing markets are primary
drivers of performance.

A factor that could lead to a downgrade of the notes is
worse-than-expected collateral performance. Other reasons that
could lead to a downgrade include poor servicing, error on the part
of transaction parties, a deterioration in the credit quality of
transaction counterparties, or lack of transactional governance,
and fraud.

ROBERTSON COATINGS: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 10
--------------------------------------------------------------
A second meeting of creditors in the proceedings of Robertson
Coatings Pty Ltd has been set for April 10, 2025 at 3:30 p.m. via
virtual meeting only.

The purpose of the meeting is (1) to receive the report by the
Administrator about the business, property, affairs and financial
circumstances of the Company; and (2) for the creditors of the
Company to resolve whether the Company will execute a deed of
company arrangement, the administration should end, or the Company
be wound up.

Creditors wishing to attend are advised proofs and proxies should
be submitted to the Administrator by April 9, 2025 at 12:00 p.m.

Manuel Hanna of Romanis Cant was appointed as administrator of the
company on March 5, 2025.


SATELITE AND SATENAV: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 15
---------------------------------------------------------------
A first meeting of the creditors in the proceedings of Satelite and
Satenav Pty Ltd will be held on April 15, 2025 at 3:30 p.m. via
virtual meeting only.

Manuel Hanna of Romanis Cant was appointed as administrator of the
company on March 5, 2025.


SHIFT OVERDRAFT 2025-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Cl. E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned the following provisional ratings to
the notes to be issued by Shift Overdraft 2025-1 Trust.

Issuer: Shift Overdraft 2025-1 Trust

AUD144.0 million Class A Notes, Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

AUD7.2 million Class B Notes, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

AUD16.4 million Class C Notes, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

AUD21.0 million Class D Notes, Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

AUD5.0 million Class E Notes, Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

The AUD5.9 million Class F Notes, AUD0.5 million Class G Notes and
the AUD2.5 million Class S Notes are not rated by us.

Shift Overdraft Trust 2025-1 is a securitisation of a closed pool
of unsecured business overdraft receivables to Australian small-
and medium-sized businesses. All portfolio receivables were
originated by Shift Finance Australia Pty Ltd, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Shift Financial Pty Ltd (Shift). Shift Financial Pty
Ltd is the servicer for this transaction. This is Shift's first
public business overdraft asset-backed securities (ABS)
transaction. Shift has sponsored three commercial equipment finance
ABS transactions to date.

Shift is an Australian SME lender providing overdraft facilities,
term loans, trade finance and asset finance to small businesses
since 2014. Shift launched its line of credit products in 2016. As
of February 28, 2025, Shift had originated over AUD4.6 billion of
loans and had 14,000 active customers.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The provisional ratings take into account, among other factors,
evaluation of the underlying receivables and their expected
performance, evaluation of the capital structure and credit
enhancement provided to the notes, availability of excess spread
over the life of the transaction, the liquidity facility to 2.00%
of the rated notes balance, the legal structure, the experience of
Shift as servicer and presence of AMAL Asset Management Limited as
a standby servicer.

The securitised asset portfolio consists of secured and unsecured
overdraft facilities to Australian small and medium businesses. The
facilities are uncommitted with an initial five-year revolving
period. Facilities within this transaction have limits ranging from
AUD10,000 to AUD500,000.  During the revolving period, overdraft
receivables amortise through weekly principal and interest
repayments over 48 months which is reset post each overdraft
further draw.

Key transactional features are as follows:

-- Once step-down conditions are satisfied, the Class A to Class E
Notes will receive their pro-rata share of principal. Step-down
conditions include, among others, the payment date is 12 months
from closing, the payment date is prior to the call option date and
no unreimbursed charge-offs or principal draws.

-- The transaction call option date, 24 months post closing after
which the transaction will not fund any further draws on the
portfolio.

-- Drawdowns of overdraft facilities in excess of available
principal collections will be funded by either, or both, Seller
Advances and Further Advance Facility draws in conjunction with
Class S Notes. Seller Advances and the Further Advance Facility are
repayable via the principal waterfall and rank senior to the Class
A Notes. The Class S Notes are repayable via the principal
waterfall and will rank junior to the Class F Notes. Seller
Advances and the Further Advance Facility have limits of AUD5
million and AUD10 million respectively. The Class S Notes will be
sized to ensure the Class A required subordination is maintained.
On closing, AUD2.5 million of Class S Notes will be issued to
Shift.

-- AMAL Asset Management Limited (AMAL, unrated) is the standby
servicer. AMAL has delegated the standby servicer functions to
Verofi Pty Ltd (Verofi, unrated), a specialist third-party standby
servicer. AMAL will, however, retain legal responsibility for the
standby servicer's contractual obligations.

In Moody's views, the transaction has the following credit
strengths:

-- Granularity of the portfolio: The securitised portfolio is
highly granular, with the largest borrower representing 0.25% of
the pool and the 10 largest borrowers representing 2.41% of the
pool. The total number of borrowers is 2,361.

-- High portfolio yield: The transaction benefits from the
collateral pool's high weighted average interest rate of 20.56%.

Conversely, it is exposed to a number of credit challenges,
including:

-- Limited historical data: Shift started significant origination
volumes of business overdraft facilities from 2019. Unsecured
business overdraft and line-of-credit products are still in their
relative infancy in Australia, with limited availability of
performance data from similar products for benchmarking purposes.
To address these data limitation concerns, Moody's have, to the
extent possible, benchmarked the performance data for Shift to data
from comparable originators and products locally and offshore.
Moody's have also overlaid additional stresses into Moody's
collateral assumptions to account for the limited data.

-- Overdraft facility revolving period: Obligor facilities have a
5 year revolving period during which obligors may draw down up to
their facility limit. Obligors may experience repayment stress when
draw downs on their overdraft facility are no longer available on
either expiry of their revolving period, or in the event Shift
became insolvent and can no longer fund further draw downs. This
risk is mitigated by (1) repayment of outstanding facility balances
are due over four years and Shift has underwritten these facilities
on a four year principal and interest serviceability basis, (2)
obligors may refinance their facility with Shift or other SME
funders on expiry of their revolving period. Refinanced facilities
do not remain in the portfolio. Moody's stressed the default
probability of these facilities to account for these risks.

-- Portfolio concentration in certain industry sectors: Borrowers
active in the construction and retail trade, as defined by the
Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification
(ANZSIC), account for 22.3% and 11.0% of the principal limit,
respectively. This increases the transaction's exposure to
industry-specific volatility.

-- Potential migration in portfolio credit quality: A potential
increase in overdraft utilisation rates of weaker obligors would
increase the exposure to these obligors, deteriorating portfolio
credit quality. This risk is mitigated by the historical stability
of Shift's portfolio credit metrics such as overdraft utilisation
rates, industry exposure, obligor credit bureau scores and
continuous credit monitoring.

-- Unrated servicer and servicing disruption: Shift is unrated,
heightening the risk of a possible disruption to servicing and
payment receipts from obligors. This risk is mitigated by a standby
servicing arrangement with AMAL Asset Management Limited (AMAL).

Key collateral assumptions:

Mean default rate: Moody's assumed a mean default rate of 13.54%
for the initial and subsequent portfolios over a weighted average
life (WAL) of 4.3years (equivalent to a B1 proxy rating as per
Moody's Idealized Default Rates). This default assumption is based
on: the available historical performance data and the
characteristics of the loan-by-loan portfolio information. Moody's
took also into account the current economic environment and its
potential impact on the portfolio's future performance, as well as
industry outlooks or past observed cyclicality of sector-specific
delinquency and default rates.

Default rate volatility and recovery rate: Moody's assumed a
coefficient of variation (i.e. the ratio of standard deviation over
the mean default rate explained above) of 41.2%, as a result of the
analysis of the portfolio concentrations in terms of single
obligors and industry sectors. Moody's assumes a recovery rate of
10%, primarily based on the characteristics of the
collateral-specific loan-by-loan portfolio information,
complemented by the available historical vintage data.

The PCE of 53.1% is based on the default rate, default rate
volatility and recovery rate assumptions.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "SME
Asset-backed Securitizations" published in July 2024.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the notes include
better-than-expected collateral performance. The Australian economy
is a primary driver of performance.

A factor that could lead to a downgrade of the notes is
worse-than-expected collateral performance. Additionally, Moody's
could downgrade the ratings in case of poor servicing, error on the
part of transaction parties, a deterioration in the credit quality
of transaction counterparties, or lack of transactional governance
and fraud.


STRONGROOM AI: Administrators Seek Sale as Court Order Hits Assets
------------------------------------------------------------------
SmartCompany reports that the administrators of embattled pharmacy
technology startup StrongRoom AI are reportedly charging ahead with
an urgent sale, despite a federal court order locking down key
assets.

According to SmartCompany, multiple outlets report administrators
from HLB Mann Judd are rushing to find a buyer for the
Melbourne-born business, despite a legal stoush pitting investors
against a portfolio company.

SmartCompany notes that the sale process and court order stem from
concerns raised by venture capital firm EVP about a "potentially
serious issue" in StrongRoom AI's books last month.

EVP, along with investors including Artesian and InterValley
Ventures, in March led a AUD17 million funding round in the
startup, which develops software helping pharmacies track and
administer medication.

Beyond its software, The Australian Financial Review (AFR) reported
the administrators are highlighting the startup's community of
pharmacy users as a selling point, SmartCompany relays.

SmartCompany says the administrators' commitment to a rapid sale is
the latest development for a startup that had impressed investors
and users with its ingenuity.

Founded by Max Mito, Christopher Durre and Kieran Start in 2017,
Strongroom AI first offered facial recognition technology to
pharmacies to assist with the administration of opioid replacements
like methadone.

It expanded its software offering over the years, and recently
boasted an AI-powered "predictive analysis" system connecting
pharmacists to community needs.

                         About Strong Room

Headquartered in Melbourned, Australia, Strong Room --
https://strongroom.ai/ -- is a drug management platform that uses
AI analytics and facial recognition technology to reduce adverse
drug events in pharmacy, hospital, and aged care facility settings.
The firm offers solutions and technologies including automated
patient verification, powerful reporting, patient alerts, automated
stock management, regular and secure back-ups, multiple terminals,
3D facial mapping, and biometric identification.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific on April
1, 2025, financiers for Melbourne startup Strongroom AI have forced
the company into administration, amid concerns about the company's
accounts.  On March 28, new regulatory filings with corporate
regular ASIC revealed that Strong Room Technology Pty Ltd was in
external administration.

Todd Gammel, Barry Taylor, Matthew Levesque-Hocking from HLB Mann
Judd stepped in on March 28 as administrators for the company,
Startup Daily discloses.

Walsh & Associates has also been appointed as receiver for banking
assets in the startup at the behest of Paddington Street Finance.


STRONGROOM AI: EVP Claims Founder Admitted to Fraud, Faked Accounts
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Financial Review reports that one of StrongRoom AI's
biggest investors alleges the start-up's founder admitted to fraud
and faked information to win a government research grant, while a
director used its accounts to pay for a trip to Morocco.

According to the Financial Review, EVP has taken the
Melbourne-headquartered pharmacy software start-up to the Federal
Court in the hope of recovering AUD10.4 million it invested last
month in a fundraising round that valued the company at AUD70
million.

The dispute over the start-up's finances became public last week
after EVP told its investors that it had reported the matter to
police. The allegation was first reported by The Australian
Financial Review's Street Talk column.

The Financial Review relates that EVP alleges that StrongRoom did
not declare more than AUD4 million in debts, and said it was
profitable despite losing AUD800,000 a month.

Documents EVP filed with the court show the venture capital firm's
partner Misha Saul became concerned about company's position after
the sudden resignation of its chief financial officer, Jacqueline
Hasler, the Financial Review relays.

"Hasler and Saul met in Melbourne on March 12, during which she
said that corporate governance within StrongRoom wasn't great and
that she was clashing with [chief executive] Max Mito," EVP's
filings read.

The Financial Review says the venture capital firm is alleging that
StrongRoom incorrectly reported money from loans and other funding
as revenue from customers, and that Mr. Mito, one of the company's
co-founders, was "stonewalling" other executives who had tried to
introduce changes to the way it operated.

Mr. Mito allegedly admitted to fraud on March 19 in a conversation
with Saul and Rohan Gray, the co-head of venture capital at
Artesian Venture Partners and a StrongRoom director, the Financial
Review relates. "I reconciled a AUD1.1 million loan last year as
revenue and I did not reverse that reconciliation. I also
misattributed other non-revenue invoices to customers as revenue,"
Mr. Mito allegedly said.

According to EVP's filings, Saul asked Mr. Mito if he had just
admitted to faking the company's revenue and "wilful fraud". "Yes,"
Mr. Mito allegedly replied.

Among a litany of allegations against the start-up and its board,
EVP claims Peter Bruce Clark, a director and a partner at Kalytix
Ventures, used the company's money to fund a personal trip to
Morocco which was also attended by Mr. Mito and his girlfriend, the
start-up's lead designer Isabella Jorgensen, the Financial Review
relays. Mr. Clark is also said to have expressed concern about the
company's transparency to investors in February last year.

EVP claims Irtaza Hussain, an accountant at Strongroom, left the
company because he had been "harassed, belittled and discriminated
against" by Mito and Ms. Jorgensen.

The Financial Review relates that Mr. Hussain alleged to EVP's
lawyers that he had been concerned about "a number of fictitious
tax invoices" issued by StrongRoom at the direction of Mr. Mito,
including a AUD115,000 payment from Ms. Jorgensen's father, Klaus
Jorgensen for 136,250 shares in the company. Mr. Mito allegedly
told Mr. Hussain to book this as revenue.

"To the best of his knowledge StrongRoom did not provide any
services in relation to that invoice and no money was ever paid to
the company in relation to that invoice," Mr. Hussain wrote in an
affidavit filed to the court.

In that document, Mr. Hussain alleged Mr. Mito had directed him to
use "fictitious" figures in a presentation for potential
shareholders in 2022, numbers that were "not based on the true
financial position of the company".

                         About Strong Room

Headquartered in Melbourned, Australia, Strong Room --
https://strongroom.ai/ -- is a drug management platform that uses
AI analytics and facial recognition technology to reduce adverse
drug events in pharmacy, hospital, and aged care facility settings.
StrongRoom was developing two products, software known as
StrongER, which tracks the movement of drugs from a pharmacy, and
StrongPro, a monitoring and reminder service for patient medication
regimes.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific on April
1, 2025, financiers for Melbourne startup Strongroom AI have forced
the company into administration, amid concerns about the company's
accounts.  On March 28, new regulatory filings with corporate
regular ASIC revealed that Strong Room Technology Pty Ltd was in
external administration.

Todd Gammel, Barry Taylor, Matthew Levesque-Hocking from HLB Mann
Judd stepped in on March 28 as administrators for the company,
Startup Daily discloses.

Walsh & Associates has also been appointed as receiver for banking
assets in the startup at the behest of Paddington Street Finance.


TEKTORCH SOLUTIONS: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 10
-------------------------------------------------------------
A first meeting of the creditors in the proceedings of Tektorch
Solutions Pty Ltd will be held on April 10, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. via
Microsoft Teams meeting.

Stephen Wesley Hathway of Helm Advisory was appointed as
administrator of the company on March 31, 2025.




=========
C H I N A
=========

GUANGZHOU R&F: Court Dismisses Winding-up Bids vs Subsidiaries
--------------------------------------------------------------
TipRanks reports that Guangzhou R&F Properties Co., Ltd. announced
the dismissal of winding-up petitions against its subsidiaries,
Trillion Glory and R&F (HK), by the High Court. This development
marks a positive turn for the company, potentially stabilizing its
financial standing and reassuring stakeholders amidst previous
legal challenges, TipRanks relates.

Guangzhou R&F Properties Co., Ltd. operates real estate businesses.
The Company provides housing renovation, housing loans, real estate
brokerage, property management, and other services. Guangzhou R&F
Properties also operates hotel management.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific in
mid-April 2023, Fitch Ratings has affirmed the Long-Term
Foreign-Currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) on Guangzhou R&F
Properties Co. Ltd. and its subsidiary, R&F Properties (HK) Company
Limited (RFHK), at 'RD' (Restricted Default). It has also affirmed
RFHK's senior unsecured rating and the rating on the
RFHK-guaranteed notes issued by Easy Tactic Limited at 'C', with
the Recovery Ratings of 'RR5'.

At the same time, Fitch has chosen to withdraw the ratings on
Guangzhou R&F and RFHK for commercial reasons.


GUANGZHOU R&F: Sells Most of Its Overseas Assets
------------------------------------------------
Caixin Global reports that Guangzhou R&F Properties Co. Ltd. has
offloaded nearly all of its overseas assets as the embattled
Chinese real estate giant grapples with a worsening liquidity
crunch.

Caixin relates that the company "has almost entirely monetised key
overseas assets for restructuring and liability management" over
the past fiscal year, Chairman Li Sze Lim said in the developer's
2024 annual financial report.

                        About Guangzhou R&F

Guangzhou R&F Properties Co., Ltd. operates real estate businesses.
The Company provides housing renovation, housing loans, real estate
brokerage, property management, and other services. Guangzhou R&F
Properties also operates hotel management.

As reported in the Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific in
mid-April 2023, Fitch Ratings has affirmed the Long-Term
Foreign-Currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDR) on Guangzhou R&F
Properties Co. Ltd. and its subsidiary, R&F Properties (HK) Company
Limited (RFHK), at 'RD' (Restricted Default). It has also affirmed
RFHK's senior unsecured rating and the rating on the
RFHK-guaranteed notes issued by Easy Tactic Limited at 'C', with
the Recovery Ratings of 'RR5'.

At the same time, Fitch has chosen to withdraw the ratings on
Guangzhou R&F and RFHK for commercial reasons.


HO WAN KWOK: Default Judgment Against Lamp Entities Affirmed
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned as LAMP CAPITAL LLC, INFINITY TREASURY
MANAGEMENT INC., Appellants, v. LUC A. DESPINS, Ch. 11
Trustee-Appellee, Case No. 3:24-cv-00217-KAD (D. Conn.), Judge Kari
A. Dooley of the United States District Court for the District of
Connecticut affirmed the order of the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the District of Connecticut granting the Trustee's motion
for default judgment and denying Lamp Capital LLC and Infinity
Treasury Management Inc.'s cross-motion to set aside default.

On the motion for default judgment, the Bankruptcy Court entered
judgment in the Trustee's favor on the first and second claims of
his complaint against the Lamp Entities in the underlying adversary
proceeding.

Lamp Capital is a Delaware limited liability company formed in
2020. ITM -- of which the Debtor's son, Qiang Guo, is the lone
shareholder -- is the sole member and nominal owner of Lamp
Capital. Lamp Capital was managed by the Debtor's agents and funded
exclusively by entities controlled by the Debtor. The Debtor
utilized Lamp Capital to pay his expenses, including, inter alia, a
$1 million retainer to Brown Rudnick LLP, the Debtor's initial
bankruptcy counsel. Lamp Capital was included in the Debtor's List
of 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors and thus, has been on the service
list in the Debtor's Chapter 11 Bankruptcy proceeding, In re Kwok,
No. 22-bk-50073, from the date it was filed.

On Oct. 26, 2023, the Trustee filed the underlying adversary
proceeding against, inter alia, Lamp Capital, principally alleging
that Lamp Capital is the Debtor's alter ego and seeking turnover of
Lamp Capital and its assets to the Debtor's Estate.

On Oct. 31, 2023, the Clerk of Court issued a summons which
directed the Trustee to serve the summons and complaint on the Lamp
Entities. Pursuant to Rule 7012 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy
Procedure, the Lamp Entities' deadline to answer or otherwise
respond to the complaint was Nov. 30, 2023. The Lamp Entities did
not do so.

On appeal, the Lamp Entities challenge the Bankruptcy Court's
findings that:

   (1) their default was willful;

   (2) they failed to present a meritorious defense to
       the Trustee's alter ego claims; and

   (3) the Trustee would be prejudiced if the entry of
       default were set aside.

The Trustee argues that the Bankruptcy Court was well within its
discretion in declining to set aside the default entry.

The District Court agrees with the Bankruptcy Court that the Lamp
Entities' failure to timely respond to the complaint is
better-viewed as a continuation of Lamp Capital's contemptuous
disregard for the broader bankruptcy proceedings, which itself is
evidence of the Lamp Entities' willful and deliberate default.
According to the District Court, the Bankruptcy Court's finding
that the Lamp Entities received timely notice of the adversary
proceeding was not clearly erroneous, and the conclusion that their
failure to respond was willful accords with applicable law.

In this case, the Lamp Entities argue that they have raised serious
questions regarding the Trustee's ability to establish his alter
ago claim against Lamp Capital, and have therefore demonstrated a
meritorious defense. However, the District Court finds the Lamp
Entities do not raise serious, or any, factual questions regarding
the Trustee's ability to establish his claim. The Lamp Entities
challenge the legal sufficiency of the allegations. As such, the
issue on appeal is whether the complaint adequately stated an alter
ego claim against Lamp Capital, and in particular, whether the
Bankruptcy Court properly considered both elements of the reverse
veil piercing test under Delaware law.

The District Court observes that the Lamp Entities had an
opportunity to assert a fact-based defense, or otherwise attempt to
dispute the Trustee's allegations regarding, e.g.,
undercapitalization, corporate formalities, solvency, and the like.
Instead, the Lamp Entities challenged only the sufficiency of the
Trustee's allegations, which the Bankruptcy Court considered and
rejected in accordance with applicable law.

The Bankruptcy Court concluded that the Complaint plausibly alleged
that Lamp Capital's corporate form served to shield the Debtor's
assets from his creditors, given that:

   (a) Lamp Capital had no business purpose or existence other than

       pooling the Debtor's liquid assets, which were siphoned to
       pay his expenses without consideration; and

   (b) its indirect, record owner was the Debtor's son (as the
      sole shareholder of ITM).

The Lamp Entities argue that these allegations do not support an
inference of fraud or injustice caused by Lamp Capital's corporate
structure. But the District Court agrees with the Trustee that
these allegations plausibly support the belief that Lamp Capital's
corporate form was utilized by the Debtor to perpetrate a fraud and
injustice.

The Lamp Entities also argue that the Bankruptcy Court erred in
concluding that the Trustee would be prejudiced if the default were
set aside, and emphasize that delay alone does not constitute
prejudice. The Trustee contends that, under the circumstances, the
District Court need not undertake the prejudice inquiry at all, and
that even if it did, the Bankruptcy Court's finding of prejudice
was not an abuse of discretion. The District Court agrees with the
Trustee.

The District Court concludes the Bankruptcy Court's factual
findings were not clearly erroneous; the Bankruptcy Court applied
correct legal principles and ultimately acted well within its
discretion in denying the Lamp Entities' motion to set aside
default.

A copy of the Court's decision is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hVAbPX from PacerMonitor.com.

                       About Ho Wan Kwok

Ho Wan Kwok sought protection under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy
Code (Bankr. D. Conn. Case No. 22-50073) on Feb. 15, 2022. Judge
Julie A. Manning oversees the case. Dylan Kletter, Esq., is the
Debtor's legal counsel.

Ho Wan Kwok aka Guo Wengui is an exiled Chinese businessman.
According to Reuters, Guo was a former real estate magnate who fled
China for the U.S. in 2014 ahead of corruption charges. Guo filed
for bankruptcy after a New York court ordered him to pay lender
Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund $254 million stemming from a
contract dispute. PAX had initially loaned two of Guo's companies
$100 million in 2008 for a construction project in Beijing and sued
Guo when he failed to pay off the loan.

An Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors has been appointed in
the case and is represented by Pullman & Comley, LLC.

Luc A. Despins was appointed Chapter 11 Trustee in the case.


HOPSON DEVELOPMENT: Fitch Lowers LT Foreign Currency IDR to 'CCC-'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded China-based Hopson Development
Holdings Limited's Long-Term Foreign-Currency Issuer Default Rating
to 'CCC-' from 'B', and the company's senior unsecured rating to
'CCC-' from 'B', with a Recovery Rating of 'RR4'.

The downgrade reflects its view that Hopson's liquidity position
has deteriorated as gross debt repayment exceeded its expectation
amid weakened sales. The group had also not repaid principal and
interest of certain borrowings according to the scheduled repayment
dates, which has triggered cross-defaults of certain bank and
financial borrowings.

Hopson's ratings reflect material uncertainty on the company's
ability in continuing servicing its near-term financial
obligations.

Key Rating Drivers

Deterioration in Liquidity; Funding Access: Hopson's reported cash
(including cash at the presale escrow account) dropped to HKD8.4
billion by end-2024 from HKD18 billion at end-June, insufficient to
cover the short-term borrowings of HKD25 billion (1H24: HKD30.6
billion). The liquidity buffer is weaker than Fitch's expectation,
as the company incurred larger-than-expected cash outflows to repay
its onshore debt in 2H24.

Gross debt declined by CNY12 billion in 2H24, depleting its cash
balances. Hopson repaid a significant portion of its debt in 2H24,
contrary to Fitch's expectation, potentially indicating its
weakened banking access.

Cross Default Triggered: Fitch believes there is uncertainty as to
whether Hopson will be able to repay or refinance the HKD25 billion
in loans maturing in 2025. The group had not repaid certain
borrowings of HKD0.9 billion according to their scheduled repayment
dates, triggering events of default which triggered further
cross-defaults of certain borrowings of HKD9.3 billion. The group
is negotiating with lenders for a debt-restructuring plan for its
defaulted borrowings.

Auditor Expressed Uncertainty: Hopson's auditor expressed
significant doubt over the group's ability to continue as a going
concern in the 2024 results announcement, although its opinion is
not modified in respect of this matter. The group is negotiating
with several existing financial institutions on the renewal of
certain borrowings. However, the success of such negotiations
remains uncertain.

Weakened Contracted Sales: Hopson's total contracted sales dropped
by 53% yoy to CNY1 billion in January-February 2025, which
underperformed the average 6% sales decline reported by the top 100
developers, according to industry data. The YTD sales are also
weaker than Fitch's previous expectation of a 10% decline for 2025.
The soft contracted sales add to the uncertainty of whether Hopson
will generate positive free cash flow (FCF) for debt repayment.

Peer Analysis

Hopson's rating reflects its weak liquidity profile and heightened
refinancing risk, amid weakened sales and significant cash outflow
to repay debt.

Key Assumptions

Fitch's Key Assumptions Within Its Rating Case for the Issuer

- Contracted sales to drop by 20% in 2025, remaining flat
thereafter

- Land acquisitions at 3%-5% of sales proceeds in 2025-2027

- Construction costs at 42% of sales proceeds in 2025-2027

- Development property gross profit margin of around 20% in
2025-2027

Recovery Analysis

KEY RECOVERY RATING ASSUMPTIONS

The recovery analysis assumes that Hopson would be liquidated in
bankruptcy. The liquidation value approach usually results in a
much higher value than the going-concern approach, given the nature
of homebuilding. Fitch assumes a 10% administrative claim.

Liquidation Approach

The liquidation estimate reflects its view of the value of
balance-sheet assets that can be realised in a sale or liquidation
processes conducted during a bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding
and distributed to creditors.

- 50% advance rate applied to net inventory. Hopson's inventory
consists mainly of completed properties held for sale, properties
under development (PUD), and deposits/prepayments for land
acquisitions.

- 50% advance rate applied to investment properties.

- 80% advance rate applied to trade receivables. Account
receivables constitute a very small percentage of total assets for
Hopson, as is typical for China's homebuilding industry. Fitch has
adopted an 80% advance rate in line with the Criteria.

- 50% advance rate applied to property, plant and equipment, which
consists mainly of land and buildings, the value of which is
insignificant.

- 0% advance rate applied to excess cash. China's homebuilding
regulatory environment means that available cash, including
pre-sales that are regulated as cash, is typically prioritised for
project completion, including payment for trade payables. Net
payables (trade payables - available cash) are included in the debt
waterfall ahead of secured debt. However, Fitch does not assume
that available cash in excess of outstanding trade payables is
available for other debt-servicing purposes, and therefore apply an
advance rate of 0%.

- 0% advance rate applied to financial investments. Fitch typically
assigns a 0%-40% cash credit to such investments due to their
liquidity and volatility. Fitch has conservatively applied a 0%
advance rate, taking into consideration the margin loan.

The allocation of value in the liability waterfall results in a
Recovery Rating of 'RR1' for the offshore senior unsecured debt.
The Recovery Rating for senior unsecured debts is capped at 'RR4'
because, under Fitch's Country-Specific Treatment of Recovery
Ratings Criteria, China falls into Group D for creditor
friendliness, and instrument ratings of issuers with assets in this
group are subject to a soft cap at the issuer's IDR.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

- Failure to refinance or repay the near-term borrowings

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

- Positive rating action is unlikely in the near term due to
ongoing negotiations with lenders regarding the renewal of
borrowings. In the longer term, positive rating actions would
require a substantial recovery in the company's sales, resulting in
a material improvement in its liquidity profile.

Liquidity and Debt Structure

As at end-2024, Hopson's reported cash of HKD8.4 billion is
insufficient to repay its short-term maturities of HKD25 billion.

Issuer Profile

Hopson is a China-based developer that specialises in medium- to
high-end large-scale residential properties in higher-tier cities.
It recorded CNY16.6 billion of contracted sales in 2024. The
company also has a portfolio of investment properties, mainly in
Beijing and Shanghai, that have generated around HKD4 billion of
annual rental income per year.

MACROECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS AND SECTOR FORECASTS

Fitch's latest quarterly Global Corporates Macro and Sector
Forecasts data file which aggregates key data points used in its
credit analysis. Fitch's macroeconomic forecasts, commodity price
assumptions, default rate forecasts, sector key performance
indicators and sector-level forecasts are among the data items
included.

ESG Considerations

Hopson Development Holdings Limited has an ESG Relevance Score of
'4' for Management Strategy as the group had not repaid certain
borrowings, triggering events of defaults which further triggered
cross-defaults of other borrowings, which has a negative impact on
the credit profile, and is relevant to the rating[s] in conjunction
with other factors.

Hopson Development Holdings Limited has an ESG Relevance Score of
'4' for Group Structure due to uncertainty regarding the financial
health of related parties and the associated risks, which has a
negative impact on the credit profile, and is relevant to the
rating[s] in conjunction with other factors.

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           Recovery   Prior
   -----------              ------           --------   -----
Hopson Development
Holdings Limited      LT IDR CCC-  Downgrade            B

   senior unsecured   LT     CCC-  Downgrade   RR4      B


HOPSON DEVELOPMENT: S&P Cuts ICR to 'CCC' On Non-payment Risk
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered to 'CCC' from 'B' its long-term issuer
credit rating on Hopson Development Holdings Ltd. S&P subsequently
withdrew its issuer rating on Hopson at the company's request.

Prior to withdrawal, the negative outlook reflected S&P's view that
Hopson could default or engage in distressed restructuring over the
next 12 months without an unforeseen positive development.

S&P said, "We lowered the rating on Hopson because we believe the
company is in a near-term liquidity crisis and could default within
the next year. According to its 2024 full year results announced on
March 28, 2025, Hopson has triggered cross-default clauses on loans
totaling HK$9.3 billion after nonpayment of certain loans worth
HK$942 million.

"We believe Hopson could default in the next 12 months because it
may have to accelerate repayment of cross-defaulted loans. The
company only had about HK$8.5 billion in reported cash and cash
equivalents as of the end of 2024.

"Hopson has limited cash on hand compared with its short-term
maturities. We assess the company's liquidity as weak because we
estimate its ratio of liquidity sources to uses will be 0.59x for
the 12 months ending Dec. 31, 2025. At the end of 2024, Hopson had
about HK$25 billion in short-term debt (including margin loans).
Its ratio of cash to short-term debt was 0.34x.

"Meanwhile, we assess the company's management and governance as
negative because of its failure to manage credit risk amid a
property market downturn.

"Prior to the ratings withdrawal, the negative outlook reflected
our view that Hopson faces a near-term liquidity crisis and could
default or engage in distressed restructuring over the next 12
months without an unforeseen positive development."

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

  -- Governance – Risk Management, culture, and oversight
  -- Governance – Other governance factors


WILL'S GROUP: Collapse Leaves Members Stranded, Staff Unpaid
------------------------------------------------------------
Caixin Global reports that desperate members of China's failed
upmarket gym chain Will's Fitness are crowdsourcing operational
updates on social media after its collapse in November 2024 left
millions of yuan in unpaid refunds and coaches working illegally in
borrowed spaces.

Since December, displaced members, who refer to themselves as
"Will's refugees" have been using the social media platform
Xiaohongshu to track the gym's disintegration through real-time
spreadsheets, Caixin relates. These crowdsourced documents log
which of the remaining 12 Shanghai locations still have working
showers, and where members might salvage one last workout.

More than 30 gyms under Will's Group, which operates the Will's
Fitness, W Fitness and VIP brands, abruptly closed in December last
year in Shanghai, home to the majority of its locations, according
to Nikkei Asia's analysis.  




=========
I N D I A
=========

3GR AGRO: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
--------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of 3GR Agro LLP
(3GR) continues to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit            15        CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with 3GR for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of 3GR, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on 3GR
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
3GR continues to be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

Formed in 2016, 3GR is a part of the Goenka group, and is managed
by Mr. Gopal Goenka and his son, Mr. Rishi Goenka. The partnership
firm processes almonds. It has a shell-cracking unit for almonds in
Jaipur.


AMEYA PRECISION: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
--------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Ameya
Precision Engineers Limited (APEPL) continue to be 'Crisil B/Stable
Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           3.25        CRISIL B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
                                     COOPERATING)

   Proposed Long Term    1.75        CRISIL B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
   Bank Loan Facility                COOPERATING)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with APEPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of APEPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on APEPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
APEPL continues to be 'Crisil B/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

Established in 1987 as a partnership firm and reconstituted as a
private limited company in 2012, APEPL is promoted by Mr. Shirish
Madhukar Pande, Mr. Nikhil Pande and Mr. Bipin Pande. It
manufactures pump and valve components such as shafts, flanges,
hardfacing and overlays, and sub-assemblies parts at its facility
in Pune, Maharashtra.


BARUA POLYMERS: CRISIL Moves B+ Debt Rating to Not Cooperating
--------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has migrated the rating on bank facilities of Barua
Polymers Private Limited (BPPL) to 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not
cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Term Loan              14         Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Rating Migrated)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with BPPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated March 17, 2025
among others, apart from telephonic communication. However, the
issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of BPPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on BPPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'.
Therefore, on account of inadequate information and lack of
management cooperation, Crisil Ratings has migrated the rating on
bank facilities of BPPL to 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not
cooperating'.

BPPL is setting up unit for manufacturing plastic products such as
bins, nursery planters and pots, etc in the Industrial Estate at
Nathkuchi district, Assam. The company was incorporated on 9th
October 2021. The entity is owned and promoted by members of Barua
family.


CHANDRIKA POWER: CRISIL Assigns B+ Rating to INR66.7cr Term Loan
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has assigned its 'Crisil B+/Stable' rating to the
long-term bank facilities of Chandrika Power Private Limited
(CPPL).

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit            25        Crisil B+/Stable (Assigned)

   Proposed Working
   Capital Facility        3.3      Crisil B+/Stable (Assigned)

   Term Loan              66.7      Crisil B+/Stable (Assigned)

The rating reflects the stability of company's cashflows owing to
assured minimum offtake for part of its installed capacity by oil
marketing companies (OMCs), eligibility to receive government
incentives, favourable demand outlook for biofuels and extensive
entrepreneurial experience of the promoter (through group
concerns). These strengths are partially offset by its nascent
stage of operations with commercial production commencing in March
2024, leveraged capital structure and susceptibility to volatility
in prices of its agro-based raw material.

Analytical Approach

The Crisil Ratings has considered standalone business and financial
risk profile of CPPL

Key Rating Drivers & Detailed Description

Weaknesses:

* Leveraged capital structure: Capital structure of CPPL is
expected to be leveraged due to high debt availed for the project.
The project was funded via term loan of INR73 crore, unsecured loan
from group companies and inter corporate deposits of INR16.6 crore
and equity of INR5.6 crore. This has resulted in adjusted gearing
ratio and total outside liabilities to tangible networth of 11.4
times and 11.6 times, respectively, as on March 31, 2024. The
operations of the company are expected to be working capital
intensive largely driven by inventory days of 100-120 days due to
seasonality of raw material and debtors of 40-60 days. Accordingly,
part of unsecured loans and advances of INR23 crore as on September
27, 2024, is expected to be utilized to fund the same. With
commercial production commencing from March 2024 and company
ramping up its facility, cash accruals are expected to increase.
Higher cash accruals along with scheduled repayment of debt is
expected to lead to improved capital structure over medium term.

* Nascent stage of operations: The company commenced commercial
operations in March 2024, and therefore has limited track record of
operations. Successful and sustainable scale up of operations will
be a key rating monitorable over the medium term.

* Susceptibility to fluctuations in raw material prices and limited
pricing power: Profitability is susceptible to fluctuations in raw
material prices maize, which depend on demand-supply factors and
are volatile. Further, with ethanol's price supplied to OMCs is
notified by government from time to time, the company has limited
ability to pass on the increased price of raw material, thereby
affecting operating margin.

Strengths:

* Assured minimum offtake for part of the capacity lends cash flow
stability: The cash flow benefits from the presence of a 10-year
contract with OMCs i.e. Indian Oil Corporation Limited ('Crisil
AAA/Stable/Crisil A1+'), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
('Crisil AAA/Stable/Crisil A1+') and Hindustan Petroleum
Corporation Limited ('Crisil AAA/Stable/Crisil A1+') thus ensuring
cash flow stability. Presently, contracted capacity is 0.99 crore
litre (~50% of the total manufacturing capacity of 60 KLPD). The
demand risk is also expected to be minimized as the company
proposes to sell balance production to OMCs as well considering
favourable supply demand gap.

* Strong industry domain of promoters: CPPL is promoted by Mr.
Ruhail Ranjan who has diverse entrepreneurial experience in
operation and management of cold storage and solar projects via
group entities. Further, Mr. Ruhail has a strong understanding of
the biofuel industry which has resulted in successful execution of
its project.

* Healthy demand for biofuels: The company's product, fuel grade
ethanol, will be used by OMCs in Ethanol Blending Program.
Government of India's targets of achieving E20 petrol (an
automotive fuel made up of 80% petrol and 20% ethanol) by 2025
through the National Policy of Biofuels 2018 and amended in 2022
which has created huge opportunity for fuel grade ethanol
manufacturers and there is a huge gap between the demand and
supply. India requires 1,500 crore litres to achieve target against
current capacity of 460 crore litres. The ready demand for ethanol
should support the business risk profile of CPPL.  Further, the
company is also eligible from interest subsidy from central and
state government besides having already received capital subsidy of
INR5 crore.

Liquidity: Stretched

Liquidity is stretched with fund-based bank limits of INR25 crore
were fully utilized over the past six months through March 28,
2025. Expected net cash accruals of INR10 crore in fiscal 2025 and
over INR15 crore in fiscal 2026 will be sufficient to cover the
annual repayment obligation of INR8.3 crore. The account has been
regular from May 9, 2024 onwards post overdrawn of cash credit
limit from March 31, 2024 to May 8, 2024.

Outlook Stable

Crisil Ratings believes that CPPL will benefit over the medium term
from its offtake agreement with OMCs and extensive experience of
its promoters

Rating sensitivity factors

Upward factors

* Ramp up of scale of operations with healthy operating margins
leading to cash accruals increasing to INR15 crore on a sustained
basis
* Higher than envisaged improvement in capital structure with
reduction in gearing
Sustained improvement in the liquidity cushion

Downward factors

* Failure to ramp up scale of operations or decline in operating
margins leading to cash accruals to repayment ratio falling below
1.1 times on a sustained basis.
* Deterioration in the financial risk profile due to significant
debt funded capex or stretch in working capital cycle

CPPL, incorporated on May 29, 2010, has set up grain based 60 KLPD
Ethanol unit in Bihar to produce ethanol in January 2024 and
commercial production started on March 29, 2024.

The company is promoted by Mr. Ruhail Ranjan (holding 99.9% stake)
and Mr. Manoj Kumar (holding 0.01% stake).


KORRUN INDIA: CRISIL Keeps B Corporate Credit Rating
----------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on Corporate Credit Rating of Korrun
India Private Limited (KIPL) continues to be 'Crisil B/Stable
Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Corporate Credit        -         Crisil B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
   Rating                            COOPERATING)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with KIPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of KIPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on KIPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on Corporate Credit
Rating of KIPL continues to be 'Crisil B/Stable Issuer not
cooperating'.

KIPL was established in 2015 as a wholly owned subsidiary of
foreign company (Anhui Korrun Co. Ltd, Listed on Shenzhen
Securities Exchange) and is engaged in manufacturing of backpacks,
travel and luggage bags. The company has its manufacturing unit
located in Bengaluru, Karnataka. The company has also set up
manufacturing facility of apparel and commercial production for the
same is expected to start in November-December 2020. Mr. Paul Wei
is the president of KIPL.


MA SHANTIMOYEE: CRISIL Cuts Long/Short Term Debt Ratings to D
-------------------------------------------------------------
Due to inadequate information, Crisil Ratings, in line with
guidelines of the Securities Exchange Board of India, had migrated
its ratings on the bank facilities of Ma Shantimoyee Rice Mill
Private Limited (MSRPL) to 'Crisil B/Stable/Crisil A4 Issuer Not
Cooperating'. However, the management has subsequently started
sharing information, necessary for carrying out a comprehensive
review of the ratings. Consequently, Crisil Ratings is downgrading
its ratings of MSRPL to 'Crisil D/Crisil D' from 'Crisil
B/Stable/Crisil A4 Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Long Term Rating        -        Crisil D (Downgraded from
                                    'Crisil B/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING')

   Short Term Rating       -        Crisil D (Downgraded from
                                    'Crisil A4 ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING')

The rating downgrade reflects delays in meeting the debt obligation
on account of weak liquidity

The ratings continue to reflect the extensive experience of the
company's promoters in the rice industry and its prudent working
capital management. These strengths are partially offset by small
scale of operations in a competitive segment and vulnerability to
changes in government policies.

Analytical Approach

Crisil Ratings has evaluated the standalone business and financial
risk profiles of MSRPL.

Key Rating Drivers & Detailed Description

Weaknesses:

* Delays in the repayment obligation: There has been instances of
delay in the repayment of principal and interest components. This
was on account of delays in bills receivables from its export
customers.

* Exposure to intense competition: The rice milling business is
intensely competitive due to organized and unorganized players
catering to regional demand. This limits MSRPL's ability to bargain
with suppliers and customers, leading to pressure on operating
margin, which is 6.1% for fiscal 2024.

* Susceptibility to changes in government regulations: Paddy being
an agricultural product, its availability is seasonal and depends
on monsoon/irrigation. This exposes MSRPL to the risk of limited
availability of raw material in case of unfavorable climatic
conditions, leading to fluctuations in paddy and rice prices. This
is compounded by limited ability to completely pass on an increase
in raw material price to customers. Also, the rice industry is
regulated in terms of paddy price, export/import of rice, and rice
release mechanism. Minimum support price of paddy and prevailing
rice price are key determinants of a rice mill's profitability.

Strength:

* Extensive experience of the promoters: Presence of more than a
decade in the rice industry has enabled the promoters to establish
relationships with farmers and dealers/distributors. This has
helped the company procure directly from farmers or traders in West
Bengal, Jharkhand, and Bihar. Products are sold under the Everest
and Everest Gold brands in West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, and
Assam.

Liquidity: Poor

Liquidity is poor as reflected in limit utilization of 99.5% in
February 2025. Unencumbered cash and bank balance of INR0.04 crores
as on 31st March 2024. The current ratio of 1.57 times as on 31st
March 2024.

Rating sensitivity factors

Upward factors:

* Sustained track record of timely debt servicing for at least 90
days
* Substantial increase in revenue and profitability, leading to
higher cash accrual

Incorporated in 2009 and promoted by Majumdar and Chunari families
of Birbhum, West Bengal, MSRPL processes parboiled rice. Operations
are managed by promoter-director, Mr. Sanjib Majumdar, along with
Mr. Sukumar Majumdar, Mr. Mintu Chunari, and Mr. Mantu Chunari.


MAHARASHTRA ALUMINIUM: CRISIL Reaffirms B Rating on Cash Loan
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has reaffirmed its 'Crisil B/Stable' rating on the
long-term bank facilities of Maharashtra Aluminium and Alloys
Private Limited (MAAPL).

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit           12.24      Crisil B/Stable (Reaffirmed)

   Proposed Working
   Capital Facility       2.76      Crisil B/Stable (Reaffirmed)

The rating continues to reflect the modest scale of operations and
the average financial risk profile of the company. These weaknesses
are partially offset by the extensive experience of the promoters
in the steel industry and their established relationships with key
suppliers and clients.

Analytical approach

Crisil Ratings has evaluated the standalone business and financial
risk profile of MAAPL.

Unsecured loans (outstanding at INR27 lakh as on March 31, 2024)
have been treated as debt as they are likely to be repaid over the
medium term.

Key rating drivers & detailed description

Weaknesses:

* Modest scale of operations: Revenue was moderate at INR56.46
crore in fiscal 2024 and is projected to be in the range of
INR59-62 crore for fiscal 2025 (Rs 52.64 crore booked till February
2025). Intense competition from various players continue to
restrict scalability, profitability and bargaining power
suppliers.

* Average financial risk profile: Networth was modest at INR6.12
crore leading to high gearing and total outside liabilities to
adjusted networth ratios of 2.98 times and 3.35 times,
respectively, as on March 31, 2024, and estimated to be around same
levels as on March 31, 2025. Debt protection metrics were average
too, with interest coverage ratio of 1.31 times for fiscal 2024 and
projected in the range of 1.31-1.35 times for fiscal 2025. Moderate
reliance on external debt for meeting working capital requirements
may continue to constrain the financial risk profile.

Strength:

* Extensive experience of the promoters and established
relationships with key suppliers and clients: The promoter, Mr.
Mandan Patel has been engaged in the steel industry for over two
decades. Over the years, he has built healthy relationships with
key customers and suppliers.

Liquidity: Stretched

Expected net cash accrual of around INR40 lakh could be tightly
matched against debt obligation of INR39 lakh per fiscal over the
medium term. Bank limit utilisation was high, averaging 93.7% for
the 12 months ended November 30, 2024. Unsecured loans of INR27
lakh were outstanding as on March 31, 2024.

Outlook: Stable

Crisil Ratings believes MAAPL will continue to benefit from the
extensive experience of the promoters in the steel industry and
their established relationships with key suppliers and customers.

Rating sensitivity factors

Upward factors

* Growth in revenue and/or operating margin, leading to cash
accrual of over INR80 lakh
* Improvement in financial risk profile

Downward factors

* Decline in revenue and/or profitability, further straining
liquidity
* Stretch in working capital cycle, leading to gross current assets
of more than 150 days

MAAPL was set up in 1982 as a proprietorship called Maharashtra
Steels and reconstituted as a private limited company in 2000,
under the current name. The company trades in galvanised and
colour-coated sheets in Latur, Maharashtra. Mr. Mandal Patel looks
after the daily operations.


NITIN FIRE: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Nitin Fire
Protection Industries Limited (NFPIL; part of the Nitin group)
continue to be 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Bank Guarantee         10         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Bank Guarantee         29         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit            45         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit            42.5       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit             5         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit            20         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Letter of Credit       25         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Letter of Credit       75         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Letter of Credit       30         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Letter of Credit       40         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Cash          12.5       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Credit Limit                      Cooperating)

   Proposed Letter        10         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   of Credit                         Cooperating)

   Standby Letter         76         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   of Credit                         Cooperating)

   Standby Letter         30         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   of Credit                         Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with NFPIL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of NFPIL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on NFPIL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
NFPIL continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

The Nitin group is promoted by Mr. Nitin Shah and his sons, Mr.
Rahul Shah and Mr. Kunal Shah. It is an end-to-end solutions
provider for fire protection and safety equipment. It provides gas-
and water-based fire protection systems, and caters mainly to the
telecommunications, information technology, banking, and
manufacturing industries. The group manufactures and trades in
high-pressure seamless cylinders and industrial cylinders.

NFPIL, incorporated in 1995, provides fire detection and fire
suppression systems, and manufactures fire extinguishers. It
entered the United Arab Emirates (UAE) by acquiring a majority
stake in New Age Co LLC (New Age), which was an associate before
April 2010. New Age is an approved vendor for all seven emirates of
the UAE, and has a strong track record of providing fire protection
services and maintenance. The Nitin group has a presence in the
Middle East through Nitin Ventures FZE and in Singapore through
Nitin Global Pte Ltd. Eurotech Cylinders Pvt Ltd trades in
high-pressure compressed natural gas cylinders and valves and
caters mainly to the domestic market. NFPIL remains part of a
non-integrated, non-incorporated joint venture at an oil block in
Rajasthan, in which it has 11.1% equity ownership.


PC JEWELLER: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of PC Jeweller
Limited (PCJ; part of the PCJ group) continue to be 'CRISIL
D/CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Long Term Rating       -         CRISIL D (ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING)

   Short Term Rating      -         CRISIL D (ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with PCJ for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of PCJ, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on PCJ
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
PCJ continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Established in 2005, Delhi-based PCJ manufactures, retails, and
exports jewellery. The product range includes gold, diamond, and
other jewellery and silver articles. The company is promoter by Mr.
Balram Garg and family. PCJ is listed on Bombay Stock Exchange
(BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE).

The company has four subsidiaries: PC Universal Pvt Ltd,
Transforming Retail Pvt Ltd, Luxury Products Trendsetter Pvt Ltd,
and PC Jeweller DMCC (incorporated in Dubai).


REKHA INDUSTRIES: CRISIL Assigns B Rating to INR2.24cr LT Loan
--------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has assigned its 'Crisil B/Stable' rating to the
bank facilities of Rekha Industries (RI).

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit           1.25       Crisil B/Stable (Assigned)

   Long Term Loan        2.24       Crisil B/Stable (Assigned)

   Proposed Fund-
   Based Bank Limits     1.51       Crisil B/Stable (Assigned)

The ratings reflect the firm's modest scale of operations and large
working capital requirement. These weaknesses are partially offset
by the extensive industry experience of the proprietor and moderate
financial risk profile.

Analytical Approach

Crisil Ratings has evaluated the standalone business and financial
risk profiles of RI.

Key Rating Drivers & Detailed Description

Weaknesses:

* Modest scale of operations: Business risk profile is constrained
by small scale in the intensely competitive granite industry.
Revenue continued to be subdued at about INR6.78 crore in fiscal
2024 (INR5.24 crore in fiscal 2023). Till February 2025, sales were
about INR5.5 crore. Despite improving, turnover will remain modest
and will continue limit operating flexibility.

* Working capital-intensive operations: Gross current assets were
287-145 days over the past three fiscals, and stood at 287 days as
on March 31, 2024, due to stretched receivables of 183 days.

Strengths:

* Extensive industry experience of the proprietor: Presence of over
a decade in the granite industry has enabled the proprietor to
develop a strong understanding of the market dynamics and establish
healthy relationships with suppliers and customers.

* Moderate financial risk profile: The capital structure of the
firm is moderate as reflected by gearing was above average at 1.95
times as on March 31, 2024. Though the networth was small at
INR2.01 crore, reliance on external debt is low. The debt
protection metrics were robust, as reflected in interest coverage
and net cash accrual to total debt ratios of 4 times and 0.07 time,
respectively, for fiscal 2024.

Liquidity: Stretched

Bank limit utilisation was around 87% for the 12 months through
January 2025. Expected annual cash accrual of INR0.3-0.6 crore will
be insufficient to meet yearly term debt obligation of INR0.3-0.6
crore, over the medium term. Current ratio was modest at 1.05 times
as on March 31, 2024. Need-based funds from the proprietor support
the overall liquidity. However, any significant increase in loans
and advances to, or investments in, group companies can impact the
overall cash flow and liquidity and will remain monitorable.

Outlook Stable

The firm is expected to continue to benefit from the extensive
experience of its proprietor and established relationships with
clients.

Rating sensitivity factors

Upward factors

* Significant and sustained improvement scale of operations and
sustenance of margin over 10%, leading to higher cash accrual
* Improvement in the financial risk profile and liquidity

Downward factors

* Decline in revenue by over 30% or significant dip in operating
profits, leading to lower cash accruals
* Large debt-funded capital expenditure or substantial increase in
working capital requirements thus weakening its liquidity and
financial profile
* Significant increase in the loans and advances to or investments
in group companies, impacting the overall financial and liquidity
profile of the firm

RI was established in 2009. RI is engaged in manufacturing of
granite slabs such as green granite slabs, granite sawn slabs,
zuprana granites slabs etc. RI manufacturing facility is located in
Hassan, Karnataka. RI is owned & managed by Lokesh Gawda.


SARIDENA CONSTRUCTIONS: CRISIL Assigns B+ Rating to INR95cr Loan
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has assigned its 'Crisil B+/Stable' rating to the
long-term bank facilities of Saridena Constructions Private Limited
(SCPL).

                          Amount
   Facilities          (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------          -----------    -------
   Proposed Long Term        95       Crisil B+/Stable (Assigned)
   Bank Loan Facility        

The ratings reflect SCPL's susceptibility to cyclicality inherent
in the Indian real estate industry and exposure to project-related
risks. These weaknesses are offset by prime location of the ongoing
project.

Analytical Approach

Crisil Ratings has evaluated the standalone business and financial
risk profiles of SCPL.

Key Rating Drivers & Detailed Description

Weaknesses:

* Susceptibility to cyclicality inherent in the Indian real estate
industry: The real estate sector in India is cyclical and affected
by volatile prices, opaque transactions, and a highly fragmented
market structure. The risk is compounded by aggressive timelines
for completion, with shortage of manpower (project engineers and
skilled labour). Also, the recent slowdown in the sector has
adversely delayed the execution and saleability of several ongoing
projects. Revenue and operating margin are susceptible to
cyclicality in the sector, too. Hence, business risk profile will
remain susceptible to risks arising from any industry slowdown.

* Exposure to project-related risks: SCPL faces moderate
project-related risks as a substantial portion (80%) of the
construction is yet to be completed. Operating performance will
remain susceptible to timely completion of the project and flow of
customer advances, which shall remain key rating sensitivity
factors over the medium term.

Strength:

* Prime location of the ongoing project: SCPL's current project
LakeWoods is strategically located in Gandipet, Hyderabad, which is
well-connected to major parts of Hyderabad including the airport,
railway station and major highways. The profitable location of the
project ensures healthy demand and, hence, steady revenue flow.

Liquidity: Stretched

Liquidity is moderate for funding the construction of ongoing as
well as upcoming projects through a mix of customer advances,
unsecured loans, and bank loans. Although the cash flows from the
project is expected to remain sufficient to meet the term debt
obligations, any unforeseen delay in project construction might
result in cost overrun, thereby affecting repayments of term debt.
Further any delay in receipt of advances from customers is also
expected to impact on the firm's liquidity in a significant way.

Outlook: Stable

Crisil Ratings believes SCPL will continue to benefit from the
extensive experience of the promoters.

Rating sensitivity factors

Upward factors

* Increase in pace of booking in ongoing project leading to
improvement in cash DSCR to more than 1.25 times.
* Early completion of the project and higher customer advances
result in substantial cash flow from operations.

Downward factors

* Lower than expected cash flow from operations because of subdued
response to, or delay in completion of, projects there by leading
to average DSCR of less than 1.1 times.
* Time and cost over run in the ongoing residential projects
leading to execution risks.

SCPL is Hyderabad-based residential real estate developer
incorporated in 2006. The is developing a residential villa project
named LakeWoods in Gandipet, Hyderabad. The project is expected to
be completed in November 2026.

SCPL is owned & managed by Mr.Saridena Suman rao, Mr. Saridena
Anand Rao and Ms. Subhadra Devi Saridena.


SUSEE PREMIUM: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Susee Premium
Automobiles Private Limited (SPAPL) continue to be 'CRISIL D Issuer
Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           4.75        CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term    0.25        CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with SPAPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SPAPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on SPAPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
SPAPL continues to be 'Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Established in 1998, SPAPL is an authorised automobile dealer for
Ford. The firm operates with one showroom in Trichy. Mr. J Rajiv
Subramanian and Mr. S Jeyabalan are the promoters.


SWASTIK ISPAT: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Swastik Ispat
Private Limited (SIPL) continue to be 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Funded Interest       0.5         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Term Loan                         Cooperating)

   Proposed Cash         8.5         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Credit Limit                      Cooperating)

   Proposed Letter       1           CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   of Credit                         Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term    2           CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

   Term Loan             1.5         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Working Capital       1.5         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Term Loan                         Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with SIPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SIPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on SIPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
SIPL continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Orissa based SIPL, incorporated in 2003, manufactures sponge iron.
Mr. Rajesh Bagaria is the promoter.


TACTIVE SOFTWARE: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Tactive
Software Systems Private Limited (TSSPL) continue to be 'CRISIL D
Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            2          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Corporate Loan         5          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term     0.5        CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with TSSPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of TSSPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on TSSPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
TSSPL continues to be 'Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Established in March 2008 and based in Erode (Tamil Nadu), URCI
develops and maintains Enterprise resource planning (ERP) software
particularly for the construction, healthcare, Small and medium
business (SMB), entertainment, and pharmaceutical sectors. The
company is promoted by Mr. C Devarajan. The day to day operations
are managed by Mr. G Gunasekaran, Director.


TILAK EXPORTS: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Tilak Exports
(TE) continue to be 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Bill Discounting       3          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Letter of Credit       2          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Packing Credit         7          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term     0.15       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

   Term Loan              3.85       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with TE for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of TE, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on TE is
consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on the
last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of TE
continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

TE was set up as a partnership firm by Ms Manju Farsaiya in 1988,
the firm manufactures and exports ladies garments. The
manufacturing facility is located at Noida (Uttar Pradesh).


TIRUPATI BALAJI: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of TBAF continue
to be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            0.5        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Term Loan              8.5        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with TBAF for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of TBAF, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on TBAF
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
TBAF continues to be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

TBAF, set up by Mr. Fulchand Mali and Mr. Mihir Virani in 2013 as a
partnership firm, trades in and stores potatoes at its cold storage
in Deesa, Gujarat.


TRISHA TRENDS: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
--------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Trisha Trends
Private Limited (TTPL) continue to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit             6        CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term      4        CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility               Cooperating)


Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with TTPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of TTPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on TTPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
TTPL continues to be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

TTPL was incorporated in 2011 to take over the business of Amrita
Creatives, a proprietorship firm set up in 2000. TTPL manufactures
and sells women's garments such as sarees, salwar suits, lehengas,
and wedding gowns, under the brand, Trisha; it has three retail
stores in Hyderabad. Ms Amrita Mishra and her sons, Mr. Mayank
Mishra and Mr. Manav Mishra, manage the business.


UNITED TECHNOMECH: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of United
Technomech Engineers Private Limited (UTEPL) continue to be 'Crisil
B+/Stable/Crisil A4 Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Bank Guarantee          8         Crisil A4 (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit             1.5       Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with UTEPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of UTEPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on UTEPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
UTEPL continues to be 'Crisil B+/Stable/Crisil A4 Issuer not
cooperating'.

UTEPL, set up in 1982 as a partnership firm and reconstituted as
private limited company in 1997, manufactures electro-mechanical
linear and rotary actuators. The company has one unit in Vasai and
two units in Pune (both in Maharashtra) with a combined production
capacity of 800-900 actuators per annum, while the fabrication
capacity is 100 tonnes per month. The company serves various
reputed players from steel, power and cement industries.


V. R. GHUGE: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of V. R. Ghuge -
Aurangabad (VRG) continue to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Overdraft Facility     10         CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term      0.05      CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

   Term Loan               0.95      CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with VRG for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VRG, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on VRG
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
VRG continues to be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

VRG was established in 1979 as a proprietorship concern by Mr. VR
Ghuge. The firm is registered as a Class I contractor and
undertakes irrigation projects for the government of Maharashtra.
These projects include construction of earthen dams, and irrigation
sluices and canals.


VENKATESHWARA SHIKSHAN: CRISIL Keeps D Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Shree
Venkateshwara Shikshan Sanstha (SVSS) continue to be 'Crisil D
Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Term Loan             11.38       Crisil D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Term Loan              4          Crisil D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with SVSS for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SVSS, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on SVSS
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
SVSS continues to be 'Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Set up in 2000, SVSS operates multiple institutes offering courses
in engineering, and management, and education, among others. It
also operates an English medium school and two charitable schools.


VIJAYLAXMI GINNING: CRISIL Keeps B Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Shri
Vijaylaxmi Ginning and Pressing (SVLGP) continues to be 'Crisil
B/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------        -----------    -------
   Cash Credit             8        Crisil B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Working        1.84     Crisil B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Capital Facility                 Cooperating)

   Term Loan               0.16     Crisil B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with SVLGP for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SVLGP, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on SVLGP
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
SVLGP continues to be 'Crisil B/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

Set up as a partnership firm in 2012 by Mr. Jayprakash Sarda, Mr.
Laxmikant Sarda, Mr. Shrikant Sarda, and Ms. Jasodadevi Sarda, SVGP
gins and presses raw cotton to make cotton bales; and also sells
cotton seed. Facility is in Hinganghat, Maharashtra. Operations
began from December 2012. The firm also set up a cotton seed oil
extraction unit, which started operating from November 2013.


VISHWAKARMA AUTOMOTIVE: CRISIL Keeps B+ Rating in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Vishwakarma
Automotive Private Limited (VAPL) continue to be 'Crisil B+/Stable
Issuer not cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           1.9         Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit           7.5         Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Long Term Loan        6.96        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Long Term Loan        5.76        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term    1.28        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility                Cooperating)

   Working Capital       6.14        Crisil B+/Stable (Issuer Not
   Term Loan                         Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with VAPL for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VAPL, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on VAPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the rating on bank facilities of
VAPL continuesto be 'Crisil B+/Stable Issuer not cooperating'.

Incorporated in 1999 and based in Faridabad, Haryana, VAPL is
managed by Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Mr. Parveen Kumar, Mr. Rajinder
Kumar, and Mr. Keshav Dhamija. The company manufactures castings
such as grey cast iron and ductile iron machined castings.


VNR EXPORTS: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of VNR Exports
(VNR) continue to be 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Bill Discounting       5          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit            3          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Packing Credit        11          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Packing Credit         5          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with VNR for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VNR, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on VNR
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
VNR continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Established as a partnership firm in 2004, VNR processes rough
diamonds into polished diamonds. Mr. Vinu K Kakadiya, Mr. Pravin B
Alagiya, Mr. Ramesh M Asodariya, Mr. Kalpesh Kakadiya and Mr.
Mahendra Kakadiya are partners in the firm. Its processing unit is
in Surat, Gujarat.


VSRK CONSTRUCTIONS: CRISIL Keeps D Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of VSRK
Constructions (VSRK) continue to be 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                        Amount
   Facilities        (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------        -----------     -------
   Bank Guarantee         13         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

   Cash Credit             2         CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                     Cooperating)

Crisil Ratings has been consistently following up with VSRK for
obtaining information through letter and email dated February 7,
2025 among others, apart from telephonic communication. However,
the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, Crisil
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VSRK, which restricts Crisil
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. Crisil Ratings believes that rating action on VSRK
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
VSRK continues to be 'Crisil D/Crisil D Issuer not cooperating'.

Established in 2002 by Mr. N T Venkateswara Rao and Mr. Ch.
Venkateswara Rao, VSRK constructs roads and bridges in Andhra
Pradesh and Telangana. The firm is recognized as a special class
contractor by Roads and Buildings department of Andhra Pradesh and
Telangana.




===============
M A L A Y S I A
===============

SAPURA ENERGY: Not Likely to Exit PN17 Anytime Soon
---------------------------------------------------
The Star reports that it may take until the second half of 2026, at
the earliest, for debt-laden Sapura Energy Bhd to qualify for the
revocation of its Practice Note 17 (PN17) status.

The Star relates that UOB Kay Hian (UOBKH) Research also said that
the six pipelay support vessels (PLSV) – operated by Sapura's
Brazilian joint venture (JV) – are more than enough to service
Sapura's yearly debt repayments of MYR200 million to MYR700 million
for the first seven years.

This will help Sapura achieve the expected "MYR4.8 billion
sustainable debt" as highlighted within Sapura's latest scheme of
arrangement, according to UOBKH Research.

The research house, which has a "buy" call on Sapura, noted that
the Brazil PLSVs had been arguably the most resilient for the group
since 2013, with a consistent quarterly JV income base.

"As we had highlighted before, the true measure of Sapura's
recovery is free cash flow generation.

"We reiterate that the PLSV will be the core boost to Sapura's
future income and reset plans."

Sapura owns half of Seagems, a Brazilian JV operating six PLSVs.

According to the report, Sapura has applied to the regulators for a
further extension until May 2025 to formalise its regularisation
plan in view of its PN17 status.

UOBKH Research pointed out that Sapura's core loss of MYR113.6
million in the financial year ended Jan. 31, 2025 (FY25) had missed
expectations.

This is because rigs were not spared from the industry's slowdown
towards the end of 2024, The Star notes.

                       About Sapura Energy

Sapura Energy Berhad, formerly SapuraKencana Petroleum Berhad, is
engaged in investment holding and the provision of management
services to its subsidiaries. The Company's segments include
Engineering and Construction (E&C), Drilling, Energy and
Corporate.

Sapura Energy Bhd announced on May 31, 2022, that it has been
classified as a PN17 listed issuer due to going concerns on its
shareholders' equity position less than 50% of its share capital.

Sapura Energy has become an affected listed issuer under PN17 on
the basis that its shareholders' equity position of MYR85 million
as at Jan. 31, 2022 was less than 50% of its share capital of
MYR10.9 billion.




=====================
N E W   Z E A L A N D
=====================

BODY SHOP: 70 Employees Left Without Jobs as Company Liquidates
---------------------------------------------------------------
Stuff.co.nz reports that seventy people will be left without jobs
as the Body Shop closes its doors after voluntary administration in
January.

A statement on The Body Shops NZ website said that all 16 retail
locations were permanently closed, and their online store was no
longer processing orders, leaving 70 permanent employees without
jobs, Stuff relays.

"Thank you for your loyal support of The Body Shop New Zealand," it
said.

"We extend our heartfelt gratitude to our valued customers for your
unwavering support throughout the years. Your passion for our
products and ethical values has meant everything to us," it said.

Liquidators Daniel Stoneman and Neale Jackson of Calibre Partners
were appointed to the company and told the NZ Herald the last store
closed its doors on February 21 after they sold all stock that the
company had on hand.

Mr. Stoneman told Stuff in January that a buyer for the business
had not been found.

The voluntary liquidation of the company came after its parent
company in the UK being placed into administration owing
NZD600,337,260 to its creditors, and was selling off its
international stock.

Managing director of retail consultant business RX Group, Juanita
Neville-Te Rito told Stuff in late January that The Body Shop
struggled to adapt to the rapidly changing beauty landscape.

"It is just incredibly uncool with no discernible aspects to
leverage. And without a clear path to revitalisation at a macro
brand level, or strong local ownership, the brand was simply not an
attractive investment."


KIND & GENTLE: Court to Hear Wind-Up Petition on May 9
------------------------------------------------------
A petition to wind up the operations of Kind & Gentle Limited will
be heard before the High Court at Auckland on May 9, 2025, at 10:00
a.m.

Rhenus Logistics Warehousing New Zealand Limited filed the petition
against the company on Feb. 25, 2025.

The Petitioner's solicitor is:

          Jeffrey Gray Ussher
          Level 19, 191 Queen Street
          Auckland


MAP TRANSPORT: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on May 4
-----------------------------------------------------
Creditors of Map Transport Limited are required to file their
proofs of debt by May 4, 2025, to be included in the company's
dividend distribution.

The High Court at Auckland appointed Craig Sanson and Stephen White
of PwC as liquidators on March 28, 2025.


MERECO LIMITED: Court to Hear Wind-Up Petition on April 7
---------------------------------------------------------
A petition to wind up the operations of Mereco Limited will be
heard before the High Court at Hamilton on April 7, 2025, at 10:45
a.m.

The Commissioner of Inland Revenue filed the petition against the
company on Jan. 29, 2025.

The Petitioner's solicitor is:

          Christina Anne Hunt
          Inland Revenue, Legal Services
          21 Home Straight
          PO Box 432
          Hamilton


PLASTERING & SERVICES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 27
----------------------------------------------------------------
Creditors of Plastering & Services Limited are required to file
their proofs of debt by April 27, 2025, to be included in the
company's dividend distribution.

The company commenced wind-up proceedings on March 27, 2025.

The company's liquidators are:

          Adam Botterill
          Damien Grant
          Waterstone Insolvency
          PO Box 352
          Auckland 1140


SCRUBZ CLEANING: Khov Jones Appointed as Receivers
--------------------------------------------------
Steven Khov and Kieran Jones of Khov Jones on April 2, 2025, were
appointed as receivers and managers of Scrubz Cleaning Services
Limited, Local Builders Limited, Everything Property Maintenance
Limited and Tree Stylers Limited.

The receivers and managers may be reached at:

          Khov Jones Limited
          PO Box 302261
          North Harbour
          Auckland 0751




=================
S I N G A P O R E
=================

BAMBOO CAPITAL: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28
---------------------------------------------------------
Creditors of Bamboo Capital Management Pte. Ltd. are required to
file their proofs of debt by April 28, 2025, to be included in the
company's dividend distribution.

The company commenced wind-up proceedings on March 20, 2025.

The company's liquidators are:

          Lin Yueh Hung
          Goh Wee Teck
          c/o 8 Wilkie Rd
          #03-08 Wilkie Edge
          Singapore 228095


FIREMANE PTE: Commences Wind-Up Proceedings
-------------------------------------------
Members of Firemane Pte. Ltd. on March 21, 2025, passed a
resolution to voluntarily wind up the company's operations.

The company's liquidators are:

          Luke Anthony Furler
           Tan Kim Han
          c/o Quantuma (Singapore)  
          137 Amoy Street
          #02-03 Far East Square
          Singapore 049965


GEM HOMES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28
----------------------------------------------------
Creditors of Gem Homes Pte. Ltd. are required to file their proofs
of debt by April 28, 2025, to be included in the company's dividend
distribution.

The company commenced wind-up proceedings on March 19, 2025.

The company's liquidator is:

          Helmi Bin Ali Bin Talib
          c/o Helmi Talib LLP
          133 Cecil Street
          #15-02 Keck Seng Tower
          Singapore 069535


HARDY AMIES: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 29
------------------------------------------------------
Creditors of Hardy Amies (International) Pte. Ltd. are required to
file their proofs of debt by April 29, 2025, to be included in the
company's dividend distribution.

The company commenced wind-up proceedings on March 11, 2025.

The company's liquidator is:

          Chek Khai Juat
          c/o Tricor Singapore  
          9 Raffles Place
          #26-01 Republic Plaza
          Singapore 048619


LCM PTE: Creditors' Proofs of Debt Due on April 28
--------------------------------------------------
Creditors of LCM Pte. Ltd. are required to file their proofs of
debt by April 28, 2025, to be included in the company's dividend
distribution.

The company commenced wind-up proceedings on March 25, 2025.

The company's liquidators are:

          Leow Quek Shiong
          Gary Loh Weng Fatt
          Seah Roh Lin
          c/o BDO Advisory  
          600 North Bridge Road
          #23-01 Parkview Square
          Singapore 188778


PUMA ENERGY: Fitch Affirms 'BB' LongTerm IDR, Outlook Stable
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Puma Energy Holdings Pte. Ltd 's (Puma
Energy) Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'BB' with Stable
Outlook and Puma International Financing S.A.'s unsecured debt
ratings at 'BB' with a Recovery Rating of 'RR4'.

Puma Energy's 'bb' Standalone Credit Profile (SCP) is aligned with
its IDR and reflects the group's leverage headroom, geographical
and business diversification, as well as sound underlying demand
drivers. These are partly offset by modest coverage metrics and
inherent cash flow volatility from its core exposure to emerging
markets (EM). Trafigura, Puma Energy's parent, is a supportive
shareholder, but considered weaker based on its Parent Subsidiary
Linkage (PSL) Criteria.

The Stable Outlook reflects its expectations that Puma Energy's
credit metrics will remain adequate and that the company will
continue to abide by its financial policy and address its
refinancing needs on a timely basis.

Key Rating Drivers

Leverage Headroom: Fitch-defined readily marketable inventory
(RMI)- and lease-adjusted net debt/ EBITDAR for Puma Energy was
2.3x in 2024 and Fitch expects it to reduce towards 2.0x by 2026,
which is comfortable for the 'BB' rating category. This leaves
headroom for potential partially debt-funded acquisitions, which
Fitch believes would be structured to accommodate the company's
tolerance of up to 2.5x net debt/EBITDA (pre-IFRS 16) under its
financial policy. However, Fitch has not factored into its rating
case any external growth.

Modest Coverage Metrics: Fitch continues to project fairly modest
RMI-adjusted EBITDAR/interest + rents cover at 2.3x-2.4x to 2028,
which is aligned with the 'b' mid-point, up from 2.2x in 2024. A
high share of fixed rental costs is a burden on Puma Energy's
credit profile, but this is partly mitigated by its financial
discipline.

Limited Refinancing Risk: Fitch believes that Puma Energy has
limited refinancing risk on its 2026 notes. The company has been
proactively reducing the outstanding balance through a USD100
million early redemption in December 2024 and further repurchases
in January 2025, leading to a reduced principal amount of USD86
million at the end of March 2025. Fitch views this amount as easy
to refinance in the coming months, given reduced financial debt in
the last three years, a simplified debt structure, and decreased
reliance on short-term bank facilities.

Performance Aligned with Expectations: Fitch expects flat to
slightly higher EBITDA in 2025 from 2024's USD319 million, which
met its expectations and reflected its exit from non-core
geographies in 2024. Fitch forecasts a modest decline in sales
volume to be offset by higher unit margins with stable fixed costs
and the recent divestments of the loss-making UK business. The
2022-2023 disposals of infrastructure assets have reduced the scale
of the business and allowed Puma Energy to focus on core
activities, but its forecast EBITDAR of about USD450 million
remains close to the USD500 million 'bb' midpoint for scale among
its rated non-food retail peers.

Strong Demand Drivers: Puma Energy benefits from sound underlying
demand drivers in EM. It has operations in over 35 countries, with
Latin America being its largest region, generating 65% of gross
profit in 2024. The top 10 countries generated around 75% of its
EBITDA in 2024. Exposure to EM can make cash flow more volatile due
to currency movements and may create challenges in a few countries
in converting cash to hard currencies for servicing debt at the
holding company level. Fitch has restricted USD50 million of cash
to reflect the risk of hard-currency shortage and challenges to
extract hard currency from these markets.

Limited Oil Price Risk: Puma Energy hedges its physical fuel
supply. All of its supply stock is either pre-sold, hedged or sold
very quickly after being procured, thus materially limiting the
risk of price fluctuations. Consequently, in evaluating leverage
and interest coverage ratios, Fitch excludes debt associated with
financing RMI and reclassifies the related interest costs as cost
of goods sold. The difference between RMI-adjusted and
RMI-unadjusted EBITDAR net leverage (both lease-adjusted) is about
1.0x.

Stronger Subsidiary under PSL Criteria: Fitch believes Trafigura
has 'open' access to and control of Puma Energy's cash flows due to
its effective control via almost full ownership and board control.
Fitch assesses legal ring-fencing as 'porous', given self-imposed
limitations on dividends and intercompany flows, despite mildly
effective regulatory ring-fencing. Fitch recognises that Trafigura
has been a strong and supportive shareholder. Changes in
Trafigura's policy or behaviour, along with more integrated funding
or a shift to less restrictive documentation, leading to material
cash leakage from Puma Energy, may lead us to reassess its links
with Trafigura under its PSL Rating Criteria.

Peer Analysis

Vivo Energy Ltd. (BBB-/Stable) is Puma Energy's closest peer.
Vivo's acquisition of Engen has significantly increased its scale
but it has high concentration in Africa across 28 countries. Its
IDR benefits from a one-notch uplift for parental support from its
'bb+' SCP. Puma Energy is more geographically diversified with its
major operations in LatAm, Africa and Asia.

The one-notch differential with Vivo's SCP is due to Puma Energy's
lower coverage on an RMI lease-adjusted basis and higher RMI- and
lease-adjusted net EBITDAR leverage. Fitch expects Vivo's RMI- and
lease-adjusted net leverage to be below 1.0x in 2025 on performance
recovery and full-year contribution from its Engen acquisition,
while Puma Energy's leverage is projected at around 2.0x in 2026.
RMI- and lease-adjusted coverage is expected to be close to 4.0x
for Vivo and around 2.4x for Puma Energy in 2025.

Puma Energy's retail operations can be compared, to some extent,
with those of EG Group Limited (B/Stable), a global petrol station
and convenience retail and food services operator. EG Group is
larger than Puma Energy, and is present in the mature European, the
US, and Australian markets. EG Group has a higher exposure to more
profitable convenience and food-to-go retail than Puma Energy,
leading to a higher expected EBITDAR margin of 6% than Puma Energy
and Vivo at 5%. EG Group's rating reflects its weaker financial
profile, with EBITDAR gross leverage expected to remain above 6x
over the rating horizon.

UGI International, LLC (UGII; BB+/Stable), another peer, is an LPG
distributor operating in EU countries, particularly France.
Compared with Puma Energy's and Vivo's EM focus, UGII's business
profile benefits from a less volatile operating environment and
stronger governance, which mitigate weakening demand in Europe.
UGII has much stronger profitability and cash generation than Puma
Energy and Vivo, due to higher margins on retail propane and LPG
sales, while Puma Energy's and Vivo's retail motor fuel sales are
more competitive and have lower margin. UGII has lower EBITDAR net
leverage than Puma Energy and Vivo, at 2.5x (no RMI-adjustment) and
significantly higher fixed charge coverage of above 9x.

Key Assumptions

- Sales volumes at about 13.5 million cubic metres (m3) for 2025,
increasing by low single digit percentages thereafter

- Stable gross unit profit margin over 2025-2028 averaging at
USD70/m3

- Broadly neutral working capital over 2025-2028

- Capex of about USD130 million a year in 2025-2028

- No material large-size M&A or divestments

- Minimal minority dividend payouts

- No foreign-exchange impact modelled

- Refinancing of the outstanding USD90 million 2026 bond in 2025

- Fitch has restricted USD50 million cash, relating to cash
balances held in countries where extraction of cash is constrained

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors That Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

- A weakening of Trafigura's consolidated group profile

- A change in Trafigura's behaviour or policy towards Puma Energy,
leading to potential material cash leakage from the subsidiary

- A revision of PSL legal ring-fencing assessment to 'open', which
combined with 'open' access and effective control, would permit
cash extraction from the subsidiary

The following developments would be considered for a downward
revision of Puma Energy's SCP

- Negative FCF margin, excluding expansionary capex/EBITDAR, on a
sustained basis

- RMI- and lease-adjusted net debt/EBITDAR consistently above 3.0x

- RMI-adjusted EBITDAR/interest + rent cover below 2.0x on a
sustained basis

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

- A strengthening of the SCP, combined with

- An improvement of Trafigura's consolidated credit profile

- A revision of PSL access & control assessment to 'porous' or
'insulated' and/or legal ring-fencing assessment to 'insulated'

The following developments would be considered for an upward
revision of Puma Energy's SCP

- Evidence of sustained unit margins and FFO margins, while EBITDAR
increases to above USD500 million

- RMI- and lease-adjusted net debt/EBITDAR sustained below 1.8x,
combined with continuing compliance with its financial policy

- Strong standalone financial flexibility, including RMI-adjusted
EBITDAR/interest + rent cover sustainably above 2.5x

- FCF margin, excluding expansionary capex/EBITDAR, above 20% on a
sustained basis

Liquidity and Debt Structure

Puma Energy had USD286 million cash at end-2024, net of USD0.5
million restricted cash and USD50 million Fitch-restricted cash for
cash balances held in countries, where cash extraction is
constrained. This is in addition to an undrawn revolving credit
facility (RCF) of USD350 million (excluding its one-year RCF), and
operating companies' uncommitted local credit facilities. Fitch
expects Puma Energy to generate low but positive cash flow for
2025-2028. The liquidity is sufficient to fully cover short-term
obligations and notes due in 2026.

Issuer Profile

Puma Energy is a global energy group with operations in over 35
countries worldwide across two core regions, Americas and Africa,
with additional assets in Europe and Asia Pacific.

MACROECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS AND SECTOR FORECASTS

Fitch's latest quarterly Global Corporates Macro and Sector
Forecasts data file which aggregates key data points used in its
credit analysis. Fitch's macroeconomic forecasts, commodity price
assumptions, default rate forecasts, sector key performance
indicators and sector-level forecasts are among the data items
included.

ESG Considerations

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

   Entity/Debt              Rating        Recovery   Prior
   -----------              ------        --------   -----
Puma International
Financing S.A.

   senior unsecured   LT     BB  Affirmed   RR4      BB

Puma Energy
Holdings Pte. Ltd     LT IDR BB  Affirmed            BB



                           *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Marites O. Claro, Joy A. Agravante, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2025.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9482.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding,
electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited
without prior written permission of the publishers.
Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed
to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

TCR-AP subscription rate is US$775 for 6 months delivered via e-
mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance
thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information, contact
Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000.



                *** End of Transmission ***