Next to none, unless you are willing to take a significant cut to your PQE. There is practically not a single aspect (other than general contract law and drafting) that you are good at, and which will be of use in a GC/ M&A team. I say this from experience, as I work very closely with projects teams on projects/ infra M&A matters. You will be lacking knowledge of the companies act and FEMA which is basically the bread and butter for any GC/ M&A lawyer. There are enough nuances in these subjects for any lawyer to take 4-5 years to achieve a level of proficiency sufficient to barely manage a mundane DD or transaction, let along complex structuring. In fact, the reverse happens quite often - where lawyers ditch GC/ M&A to enter other transactional practice areas like real estate, TMT, projects etc.

The only thing which Projects lawyers are good at is due diligence given how infra/PPP mandates span heftier layers of diligence across common red flags in mergers/PE deals. Despite that, a lot of infra development/bid scenarios dont go through in India. Beyond these issues, the practice is terrible in terms of margin and comes with twice the slog which GC lawyers are required to do.

Neither GC nor Infra space is rocket science. People who crib about costs and output in projects, never have negotiated a a 25 year LNG contract or a long term green ammonia contract or say a project development suite of contracts, all of which, individually, pay more than a run of the mill M&A transaction. Each practice does come with its own set of issues and nuances. But people saying that Project lawyers are only good at diligence, seem to know neither projects nor diligence. Somebody who has been doing regulatory litigation diligence pieces will take a dump and wipe his ass twice with the corporate chapter - CCDs, NCDs, Equity Instruments, terms, coupon, redemption, previous issuances and sale. Close your eyes and throw a pebble in Lower Parel, you will hit a GC/M&A so called specialist lawyer, who will look at the transaction advisor and the tax advisor to decide if your acquisition will have locked box structure and copy the same set of representation or warranty and the process for third party claims. My advice would be not to transition, M&A lawyers are dime a dozen. Rather do better in projects, you can always get a pompous self important prickly M&A lackey to do your documentation and act like a client's manservant,