With the June 1, 2026, deadline for mandatory sourcing of solar cells from the Approved List of Models and Manufacturers (ALMM) List-II fast approaching, solar developers are urging the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE) to consider a time-bound extension, citing concerns over limited operational Tunnel Oxide Passivated Contact (TOPCon) capacity and potential project delays.

They warn of supply-demand mismatches, cost escalation, and execution risks if the mandate proceeds without adequate stabilization of domestic production. However, manufacturers oppose any deferment, arguing that sufficient capacity exists and that frequent policy reversals could undermine investor confidence and ongoing investments in India’s solar manufacturing ecosystem.

The MNRE in December 2024 mandated that, from June 1, 2026, solar modules must use cells sourced only from manufacturers listed under the ALMM List-II (Solar PV Cells). This move is aimed at strengthening domestic manufacturing.

Solar developers are considering requesting the MNRE to extend the implementation date for ALMM List-II (Solar Cells), citing insufficient domestic TOPCon cell capacity.

They argue that the current operational TOPCon capacity may lead to a supply–demand mismatch, project delays, and cost escalation once mandatory sourcing begins.

According to Mercom India Research, the current operational cell lines have a capacity of around 28 GW.

Solar developers believe that while certain project categories are exempted based on bid submission dates and commissioning timelines, a large pipeline of future projects will be hamstrung by the limited TOPCon cell capacity, driving prices higher.

They have proposed a time-bound extension (up to October 1, 2026) to allow domestic capacity to ramp up smoothly and ensure seamless project execution.

“The extension will not affect the domestic manufacturing market in any way. Domestic manufacturers can offload all their production to domestic or international markets without any problems and at very high prices. If you look at the profitability of all the companies listed under ALMM, you will see that all are performing well, making handsome profits and having sufficient reserves,” said Viraj Gadhoke, Managing Director at Vibgyor Energy.

Gadhoke said TOPCon is preferred by commercial and industrial (C&I) consumers. “To remain competitive and deliver a solution, we have been pitching TOPCon to the market as it requires less land. And now TOPCon will not be available at optimal, appropriate quality and price.”

According to industry experts, working capital constraints remain a significant challenge for module manufacturers. Most production lines can comfortably operate for only 30–45 days with confirmed orders. Beyond that horizon, liquidity pressure begins to build. At the same time, the current lead time from order to delivery of finished modules is at least 60 days.

The industry says it remains unclear how this dynamic will evolve with greater cell integration, but it could potentially intensify working capital requirements in the short term. In practice, working capital stress often forces manufacturers to operate lines below optimal capacity, even when nameplate capacity appears sufficient.

“Most of the cell lines that will be announced online, from now to June 2026, the stabilization for the timelines for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) is a minimum of six months before they get stable production capacity. For developers, independent power producers (IPPs), or engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) companies that need to provide generation guarantees, it is an extremely sensitive matter, and we need a stable technology to work with,” noted Rounak Muthiyan, Founder of Kalpa Power.

Developers have reiterated their commitment to continued investments in advanced cell technologies, including TOPCon and next-generation solutions. However, they believe that a pragmatic, time-bound extension and a phased implementation of the ALMM List-II for solar cells are required to ensure a smooth transition without unintended disruptions to project execution.

Muthiyan noted that if the implementation is not deferred, there will be a run on the price, given the limited number of manufacturers. The shortage will drastically reduce the reliability of solar projects, as none of the OEMs can provide guarantees.

Commenting on the tightening of TOPCon cell supply in the near future, Muthiyan said right now, everything is based on nameplate capacity. None of them is evaluating the capacity utilization factor, which has such a strong bearing. So, unlike the ALMM list for modules, which was primarily driven by the ability to install or assemble, developers must rely on chemical facilities, in the case of cells, to achieve a stable production.

“I think it’s asking way too much, too early.”

Developers believe it’s not wise to take on any new projects this year as the deadline approaches. From a C&I segment perspective, they believe that relaxing the implementation date for projects would suit everyone.

Recently, MNRE issued the fourth revised Approved List of Models and Manufacturers List-II for solar cells, raising the total enlisted capacity to 26 GW.

“Even today, people are talking about nameplate capacity rather than the actual capacity delivered. So, I think unless and until we get sizable metrics about what is a stable production capacity from all the manufacturers over the last six months, it’s very hard for developers to find trust in the market that the market has an ability to deliver,” opined Muthiyan.

Avinash Hiranandani, Vice Chairman and President at RenewSys India, a solar cell manufacturer, had a different take. “The government wants people to invest in the manufacturing sector. There are people at various stages of investment. Frequent policy reversals undermine credibility and weaken investor confidence,” he said. He contended that there is sufficient TOPCon capacity in the market.

“The challenge is that once a deadline is postponed, it tends to keep getting pushed further. I am not in favor of extending the implementation deadline,” Hiranandani said.

The June 2026 deadline is not far away. The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy must decide one way or the other so that solar developers have clear visibility.

With just a few months left before the June 2026 deadline, the industry is seeking regulatory clarity. Developers argue that a calibrated, time-bound extension could ensure smoother execution and prevent unintended disruptions and escalated prices, while manufacturers stress that policy consistency is essential to sustain investment and capacity expansion. Ultimately, MNRE’s decision will need to balance supply readiness with investor confidence, ensuring that India’s push for domestic manufacturing does not inadvertently slow solar deployment.

Either way, MNRE should provide clarity well ahead of the deadline to avoid further confusion and speculation, giving both developers and manufacturers sufficient time to prepare and recalibrate their strategies.