P. Provisions
Provisions are recognized when, as a result of a past event, the Company has a legal orconstructive obligation; it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settlethe obligation; and the amount can be reliably estimated. The amount so recognized is a bestestimate of the consideration required to settle the obligation at the reporting date, taking intoaccount the risks and uncertainties surrounding the obligation.
In an event when the time value of money is material, the provision is carried at the presentvalue of the cash flows estimated to settle the obligation.
Q. Operating Segment
The Company is engaged in a single segment i.e. financing Operations viz., inter corporatedeposits and investments. Presently Company is not carrying on any operation except realizingall debts or maintaining existing assets. The operating results are regularly reviewed andperformance is assessed by its Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM). All the company’sresources are dedicated to this single segment and all the discrete financial information isavailable for this segment.
R. Earnings per share
Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividing profit or loss attributable to the owners ofthe company by weighted average number of equity shares outstanding during the financialyear. The weighted average number of equity shares outstanding during the year is adjustedfor events of bonus issue, share split and any new equity issue. For the purpose of calculatingdiluted earnings per share, profit or loss attributable to the owners of the Company and theweighted average number of shares outstanding during the year are adjusted for the effects ofall dilutive potential equity shares.
S. Contingent liabilities
A disclosure for a contingent liability is made when there is a possible obligation or a presentobligation that may, but probably will not require an outflow of resources. When there isa possible obligation or a present obligation in respect of which the likelihood on outflow ofresources is remote, no provision or disclosure is made.
T. Financial and Management Information Systems
The Company’s Accounting System is designed to unify the Financial Records and also tocomply with the relevant provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, to provide financial and costinformation appropriate to the businesses and facilitate Internal Control.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accountingprinciples requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reportedamounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the financialstatements and the results of operations during the reporting period end. Although theseestimates are based upon management’s best knowledge of current events and actions, actualresults could differ from these estimates.
The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions toaccounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised if the revisionaffects only that period or in the period of the revision and future periods if the revision affectsboth current and future periods.
The management for a structured debt repayment had prepared two schemes of arrangementfor reorganization of share capital of the company and for compromise with its secured andunsecured creditors. Both the schemes of arrangement envisage a viable, just & equitablesettlement with its secured and unsecured creditors while simultaneously increasing the risk andstake of the promoters and their shareholding through fresh infusion of funds by the promotercompany.
The company moved an application before the Hon’ble Company Law Board, New Delhi on22nd July 2004 under Regulation 44 of the Company Law Regulations, 1991 proposing afresh repayment schedule to fixed depositors of the Company. The same repayment scheduleincluded in the “Fresh Restructuring Scheme” filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi atNew Delhi on 24th September 2004.
The implementation of the schemes is subject to the fulfillment of all the conditions of erstwhilesection 391 to section 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 and approval/orders of the Hon’bleDelhi High Court. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court did not approve the company’s first schemefiled in May 2000, though approved by the secured and unsecured creditors in their respectivemeetings convened pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Court, yet the Hon’ble Court did notaccord sanction to the scheme on technical grounds. An application for review had been filedbefore the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 30th May 2003, which is not yet to be listed for hearingand which is hereinafter, wherever applicable, referred to as the “Old scheme under review”.The company intends not to pursue the review application filed for the old scheme under reviewbefore the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and it is proposed to be withdrawn at an appropriate stageof the proceedings for the sanction of the “Fresh Restructuring Scheme”.
The company filed a fresh Scheme of Arrangement for the reorganization of the share capitalof the company and for compromise with the secured and unsecured creditors of the company,hereinafter referred to as the “Fresh Restructuring Scheme” before the Hon’ble Delhi High Courtat New Delhi on 24th September 2004.
Pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the unsecured creditors and debentureholders in their meeting convened under the Chairpersonship of court appointed Chairpersons(retired Judges of Hon’ble Delhi High Court) on 1 stApril 2005 and 2nd April, 2005 haveapproved the scheme without any modifications with the requisite majority. The meeting of theother secured creditors (banks/ institutions) was held on 17thSeptember 2005 and has alsoapproved the scheme by the requisite majority after considering some modifications proposedby the Punjab & Sind Bank.
The promoter company has undertaken, subject to sanction of the scheme by the Hon’ble DelhiHigh Court, to contribute to Rs. 1,950.00 lacs of which Rs. 1,560.00 lacs were deposited with theRegistrar of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court Registrar, as per court order by the promoter group,and the balance amount of Rs 390.00 lacs had been deposited with the Registrar of the Hon’bleDelhi High Court Registrar on 27th April, 2012.
The restructured debts of the company for each category of debt is on the basis of outstandingas envisaged in the fresh restructuring scheme filed in the year 2004 excluding interest notprovided for and all liquidated damages/penal charges and interest on unpaid interest. The“Fresh Scheme of Arrangement” is drawn on the basis of acceptance of waiver of payment ofpast and future interest, penal charges, liquidated damages, and any other charges, costs andclaims etc. except as provided and for values contained therein which is subject to the approvalof the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
Over the years and till 31st March, 2017, the accounts of the company have been drawn onthe assumption that the “fresh restructuring scheme” will be accepted and implemented. If it isnot accepted and cannot be implemented for any reason the total liability before the proposedrestructuring scheme including those for which no provision has been made and has beenquantified under appropriate heads, shall become payable.
Developments till the financial year ended 31st March 2024
Justice Anil Kumar* as one-man committee was appointed vide order dated: - 3rd September,2015 by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi to scrutinize the list of depositors and other claimantsand to take steps enumerated hereinafter with the view to resolve at-least some of the disputes.The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi entrusted the following functions to said One Man Committee: -
(i) To scrutinize and finalize the list of depositors/ claimants so as to assess the genuinenessof the depositors and their claim and to weed out any duplicate) benami, fictitious anddoubtful claims.
(ii) To categorize the claimants/ depositors into groups, on the basis of various parameters. Forinstance, depositors could be segregated into (a) individuals (b) corporate (c) institutions(Banks and Finance Companies), etc. Similarly, very small depositors wherein, the amountdue is only up to Rs. 0.05 lacs could be segregated as a separate category.
(iii) At the same time, it would also be open to the Central Bank of India which was constituteda debenture trustee by the company, to put up any claims that they may have before thesaid committee.
(iv) To take stock of the entire assets of the company, whether in the form of fixed assets orbank accounts and fixed deposits, etc.
(v) To assess the value of the fixed assets of the company and for the purpose, if need be,take the help of a professional valuer. Also, to get from the company its brief statement ofaccounts which shall include all income and expenditures, so as to enable a proper reviewof the assets and liabilities of the company.
(vi) To suggest modalities for the disposal of fixed assets, so that the money realized couldbe used for disbursal of principal amounts as well as interest (over the delayed period), ifpossible, amongst the depositors.
(vii) To make suggestions on the modalities of payment, which would obviously depend upon theamounts finally realized after disposing off/ liquefying all assets of the company.
*The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has appointed Mr. Laxmi Kant Gaur, District Judge (Red.)vide its order dated 29th July 2021, as the One-Man Committee in place of Hon’ble Mr.Justice Anil Kumar (in view of his unfortunate demise). The One-Man Committee wouldcontinue from the stage at which the exercise assigned to the One-Man Committee bythe High Court stands, at the stage when Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar unfortunatelyexpired. The agenda of the One-Man Committee would be as per the order dated 3rdSeptember, 2015, read with subsequent orders passed, if any, in that regard. The One-Man Committee would be entitled to remuneration of Rs. 1 lakh per month to be paid fromthe account of the Company.
The one-man committee submitted its report on to Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 22ndApril, 2016. Taking cognizance of the report, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 10th August,2017 accepted the recommendation of one-man committee enumerated in the report.Hon’ble High Court of Delhi also noted that none of the parties had any objection onthe implementation of the report. The task of implementing the report was also assignedto Justice Anil Kumar. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that the issue of revival of thecompany will be decided once all payments are made in the manner as suggested in thereport. The report of one committee has laid the schedule of payments to parties coveredunder the scheme as under: -
(i) Before starting repayment of amount, the genuineness of the all the depositors andtheir claims shall be assessed to weed out any benami, fictitious and doubtful claims.Notices to all the depositors / claimants shall be sent and consideration of their pleaseand contentions will be necessary. From the data it has also been observed thatsome of the individuals and companies have invested sums by depositing multiplesmall amounts. Committee observed that it already has sufficient funds, ready cash,to repay about 70% of the deposits to all the depositors having deposits of more thanRs 0.05 lacs including secured creditors in the first stage. It is recommended in thecircumstances that 70% a part of the amount be paid to the creditors having depositsof more than Rs. 0.05 lacs and full amount be paid to those who have deposits of Rs.0.05 lacs or less than Rs. 0.05 lacs in the first instance.
(ii) In order to realise the maximum value of the immovable asset of the Company,the premises/property in the building of NBCC, it is the recommendation of thecommittee that the same be sold by the auction by the Hon’ble Company Court. Thecompany has estimated its value around Rs. 4,100 lacs, whereas the creditors areof the view that its value will not be less than Rs 8,000 lacs. It has been noticed thatthe disputes are pending between NBCC and the Petitioner Company with regard tothe said property which is’ pending adjudication before Shri S.K. Kaul, Sole Arbitratorappointed by NBCC in terms of Agreement dated 9th Dec, 1995 and is now fixedfor final arguments. The claim of NBCC is for an amount of Rs.288 Lacs. It is alsonoticed that such other and several disputes are pending with regard to this NBCCproperty, which make it unfeasible for anyone to sell it easily or to get a realisticvalue of the property on the basis of valuation report and then to decide on suchvaluation as to how much total amount is to be paid to the creditors. Valuation ofsuch a property will also be more of distress sale value and will not be realistic. Inthe circumstances an efficacious way will be to pay a part of the amount from theliquid assets available with the company and in the meantime also to sell the fixedassets of the Company by auction by the Hon’ble Company Court. This will resultin a part payment to all the genuine creditors and to realize the actual value of theimmoveable assets of the Company. This will also facilitate the Hon’ble CompanyCourt to determine whether some interest should be paid to the creditors consideringall the other factors including that the endeavor is not to wind up the Company but torevive the Company if sufficient surplus is available with the Company after sellingall its immoveable assets. Therefore, it is recommended” that the” immovable andfixed assets of the company be sold by auction by Hon’ble Company Court in themanner adopting the modalities which are followed while selling the fixed assets andthe immovable properties of the companies which are under liquidation with the helpfrom Official Liquidator or a Consultant, though the sale of the properties is not forthe purpose of winding up the Petitioner Company.
Phase 2
In the second phase, which should also commence. with phase 1 simultaneously, propertiesand shares and all the assets be liquidated by selling and the realized amount is recommendedto be utilized for the repayment of balance 30% of principal and the maturity value on the fixeddeposits, debentures and banks. If the amount is still available to the Company, the Hon’bleCompany Court may decide whether some amount - be paid as interest as has also beenrecommended by the Reserve Bank of India. Certain steps of the Phase 2 which can commencewith phase 1 i.e. sale of the properties of the Company by the Hon’ble Company Court and/orsuch steps which will be required to sell the assets of the Company in order to realize the valueof the assets to meet the liabilities of the fixed deposits and debentures creditors.
Hon’ble Bombay High Court. No claim has however, been filed by the Central Bank of India beforethe Committee despite opportunity granted to the Bank. While computing the amount payable inphases to other creditors, this amount claimed by the Bank will be not disbursed till the bank is ableto establish its claim in the appropriate proceedings before the Court.
Payments to debenture holders are being made as per the recommendation of One-Man Committeefrom the Financial Year 2017-18 to 2023-24. Refer note 15.2 for details regarding repayments madeto debenture holders.
PUNJAB & SIND BANK (PSB)
Background
The Punjab and Sind Bank had filed recovery proceedings in the year 2000 before the Debt RecoveryTribunal for Rs. 1,217 Lacs comprising of Rs.850 lacs as ledger balance and Rs.376 lacs as MemoInterest. In the year 2000. Company in order to redress the repayment issues, propounded a schemeand in the scheme of rearrangement with its creditors proposed to pay Rs 951 lacs to the Bankand the Bank voted in favor of scheme and the suit in DRT has been stayed by the High Court andthe Bank agreed to receive Rs. 951 lacs. This amount was agreed after protracted discussions /negotiations with PSB, and it has been agreed that amount payable as on Sept, 1997 will be taken asprincipal and interest from Sept 1997 to March, 2000 will be added @ 10% quarterly compounded.Thus, the amount payable became Rs 951 lacs. It was admitted and justified by the said bank that
this settlement was as per RBI guidelines. Reliance for this can be placed on an internal note dated12th Sept, 2000 of the bank and a letter dated 20th Oct, 2000 from the counsel of PSB. As perterms of settlement Rs 50.00 Lacs were paid to PSB in the year 2000. Though the part payment hasbeen made to the Bank pursuant to settlement and scheme, however, due to modifications madein scheme for, PSB by Company in the creditors meeting. The scheme was, will be paid in 6 equalyearly installments of one year after the approval of the said scheme or 1st April, 2006 which everwill be earlier and balance 40% by equity shares at any time within three years of the effective dateor 1.4.2006. The shares were to be allotted on preferential allotment basis as per the rate approvedby SEBI under its guidelines. The sale price of the share was protected to the extent of Rs.375 lacsby issuing fresh additional equity, if required. The bank was paid Rs. 90 lacs in the year 2005-06, butfurther amount could not be paid on account of order dated 6th March, 2006 “of the Hon’ble Court.The Bank received the amounts partly under the settlement and could not withdraw from the schemewithout refunding the amounts received by it, yet in 2012 it filed an application for intervention /objection to the scheme which has not been allowed. In the circumstances the amount payable to thebank has been taken as settled with the Bank and 70% of the. said amount be paid forthwith in the firstphase and balance in the second phase which is substantially better as earlier only Rs.60 lakhs waspayable in six years and equity shares were to be issued for the balance amount. Under the previousproposal which has been accepted by the Bank, the amount was payable in installments and part ofthe amount by converting the amount in’ equity shares whereas under present recommendation 70%of the amount is payable forthwith and balance’ amount in second phase after liquefying all the assetsof the Company which will be probably within two years.
In the scheme, the amount payable to Punjab & Sind Bank has been quantified at Rs. 901.80 lacsas on 30th June 2004. This figure has been arrived at after compounding the interest payable on theprincipal amount due as on 30th September 1997, at the rate of 10% compounded quarterly till 31stMarch 2000, after allowing credit for actual amount paid till date. (Present Value of amount payableafter all adjustments the payable amount is Rs 803.4 lacs) The settlement made with the Bank inthe scheme earlier has been considered as the base. Accordingly, keeping in line with the abovesettlement and OTS guidelines of RBI, the following payments is recommended to be made to PSB:
INDUSIND BANK
In the scheme, the total principal amount payable to IndusInd Bank has been quantified at Rs 651.50Lacs as on 30th June 2004. This figure has been arrived at after calculating interest upto31st March 2000@12% p.a. compounded quarterly on the principal amount of L/C devolvement, after allowing credits foractual amounts paid till date and credit for margin money amounting to Rs. 35.99 Lacs, and excludespenal interest/ additional interest/ overdue charges, if any, debited by the’ Bank. (Present outstandingafter all adjustments is Rs 577.00 lakhs) The settlement made with the Bank in the earlier scheme hasbeen considered as the base. The total amount payable under the scheme to IndusInd Bank so quantifiedshall be repaid in line with the above settlement and RBI guidelines of OTS is as under:
28) Contingent Liabilities and Commitments
A) Contingent Liabilities
(a) During the year ended 30th June, 2011 the company’s tenant had filed a claim of Rs.100.00 Lacs against the company due to damages suffered by the tenant which is stillpending under arbitration proceedings as on 31st March, 2024.
(b) There is an award passed by the High Court vide its judgment dated April 27, 2022 againstthe company in the matter of MS Shoes East Limited for Rs. 12.82 Lacs i.e. the claimamount, along with interest of Rs. 8.97 Lacs for an underwriting given by the company inthe year 1995 for the public issue of M/s MS Shoes East Ltd
(c) Due to dispute with the builder namely M/s NBCC Ltd. from which the company hadpurchased an office premises in the year 1995, regarding a claim of Rs. 288.29 Lacs onaccount of increase in super area and certain other expenditure which the builder i.e. M/sNBCC Ltd. had incurred and the same is pending in arbitration. Breakup of the amount ofRs. 288.29 lacs mentioned supra is as follows:
In addition to the above, Interest @ 10% is payable by both the parties on their respectiveamounts.
That whereas NBCC has filed objections to the award in Delhi High Court in December2020 and the same appears to be lying in objections.
That DCM has also filed objection in Delhi High Court and the same has not being listedso far.
Company Management is hopeful that there will not be any extra claims in view of Awarddeclared by Arbitrator.
B) Commitments
There are no non-cancelable capital commitments.
29) Defined Benefit Plans/Long Term Compensated Absences:-Description of Plans
The Company makes contributions to Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Plans forqualifying employees. Gratuity Benefits and Leave Encashment Benefits are unfunded innature. The Defined Benefit Plans are based on employees’ length of service.
The liabilities arising in the Defined Benefit Schemes are determined in accordance with theadvice of independent, professionally qualified actuaries, using the projected unit credit methodat the year end. The Company makes regular contributions to these Employee Benefit Plans.The net Defined benefit cost is recognized by the companies in Financial Statements.
The following table summarize the components of net benefit expenses recognized in thestatement of Profit & loss and the funded status and the amount recognized in Balance Sheet
1 irinrt OnOT OA
30) For year ended 31 March, 2024 and 31 March 2023, Company has no dues from any partycovered under the Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED).
31) The Company has brought forward unabsorbed depreciation under the Income Tax Act, 1961but it is unlikely to have taxable income in the foreseeable future. Deferred tax assets in situationwhere carry forward unabsorbed depreciation/business loss exists, are not recognized to theextent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profits will be available to allow all orpart of the asset to be recovered, accordingly Deferred Tax Assets on Unabsorbed DepreciationLosses are not recognized in accordance with Ind AS 12 “Income Taxes”.
32) Deposit of Rs 1,950.00 lacs by DCM Services Limited
DCM Services Ltd, as a promoter had committed to bring in Rs 1,950.00 lacs as a promotercontribution upon sanction of their restructuring scheme under erstwhile Section 391 of theIndian Companies Act, 1956 which is under implementation by One Man Committee appointedwith the direction of Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
The Court vide order dated 06.05.2008 has asked DCM Services Limited to deposit Rs.1,950.00 lacs with the Court and pursuant to the court order. DCM Services Limited depositedRs 500 Lacs on 16.07.2010, Rs 670 lacs on 18.11.2010, Rs. 390 lacs on 21.04.2011 & Rs.390 lacs on 27.04.2012 aggregating to Rs. 1,950.00 lacs on behalf of the promoters with theRegistrar, Hon’ble Delhi High Court. All the funds are with Delhi High Court along-with accruedinterest thereon. No financial impact of this has been recorded in the financials of the companytill the period ended 31st March, 2024 as there is no clarity provided by Hon’ble High Court ofDelhi on whether Company would have to issue any shares against such contribution as perSEBI guidelines or such amount would be refundable to DCM Services Limited or there wouldbe no liability on the Company to pay or issue any shares. Till Company gets any clarity on thismatter, no financial entry has been recorded in the books of accounts.
The Company determines the fair value of its financial instruments on the basis of the followinghierarchy:
Level 1: The fair value of financial instruments that are quoted in active markets are determined onthe basis of quoted price for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2: The fair value of financial instruments that are not traded in an active market are determinedon the basis of net asset value as per last available audited financial statements.
Level 3: If one or more of the significant inputs is not based on observable market data, the fair valueis determined using discounted cash flow method with the most significant inputs being the discountrate that reflects the credit risk of the counter-party.
35) Capital Management
The Company’s objective for managing capital is to ensure as under:
a) To ensure the company’s ability to continue as a going concern.
b) Maintaining a strong credit rating and healthy debt equity ratio in order to support businessand maximize the shareholders’ value.
c) Maintain an optimal capital structure.
d) Compliance financial covenants under the borrowing facilities
For the purpose of capital management, capital includes issued equity capital, and all otherequity reserves attributable to the equity holders of the Company.
The Company manages its capital structure keeping in view of:
a) Compliance of financial covenants of borrowing facilities.
b) Changes in economic conditions.
In order to achieve this overall objective of capital management, amongst other things, theCompany aims to ensure that it meets financial covenants as decided by One Man Committeeand Delhi High Court. One Man Committee has given few recommendations for paymentsto its creditors which has been accepted by Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
There has been no breach in the financial covenants of any borrowing facilities in the currentperiod. There is no change in the objectives, policies or processes for managing capital overprevious year.
36) Going Concern Basis
Pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, the unsecured creditors and debentureholders in their meeting convened under the Chairpersonship of court appointed Chairpersons(retired Judges of Hon’ble Delhi High Court) on IstApril 2005 and 2nd April, 2005 haveapproved the scheme without any modifications with the requisite majority. The meeting of theother secured creditors (banks/ institutions) was held on 17thSeptember 2005 and has alsoapproved the scheme by the requisite majority after considering some modifications proposedby the Punjab & Sind Bank. The promoter company has undertaken, subject to sanction of thescheme by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, contributed Rs. 1,950.00 lacs of which Rs. 1,560.00lacs were deposited with the Registrar of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court Registrar, as per courtorder by the promoter group, and the balance amount of Rs 390 Lacs had been depositedon 27th April, 2012. The Fresh Restructuring Scheme kept pending for approval of Hon’bleHigh Court of Delhi. Over the years and till 31st March, 2017, the accounts of the companyhave been drawn on the assumption that the “fresh restructuring scheme” will be accepted andimplemented. If it is not accepted and cannot be implemented for any reason the total liabilitybefore the proposed restructuring scheme including those for which no provision has beenmade and has been quantified under appropriate heads, shall become payable.
Justice Anil Kumar as one-man committee was appointed vide order dated: - 3rd September,2015 by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi to scrutinize the list of depositors and other claimantsand to take steps enumerated hereinafter with the view to resolve at-least some of the disputes.
The one-man committee submitted its report on to Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 22nd April,2016. Taking cognizance of the report, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on 10th August, 2017accepted the recommendation of one-man committee enumerated in the report. One ManCommittee observed that that it already has sufficient funds, ready cash, to repay about 70% ofthe deposits to all the depositors having deposits of more than Rs 0.05 lacs including securedcreditors in the first stage. Under Phase -1, 70% a part of the amount be paid to the creditorshaving deposits of more than Rs. 0.05 lacs and full amount be paid to those who have depositsof Rs. or less than Rs.0.05 lacs in the first instance. In the second phase, which should alsocommence. with phase 1 simultaneously, properties and shares and all the assets be liquidatedby selling and the realized amount is recommended to be utilized for the repayment of balance30% of principal and the maturity value on the fixed deposits, debentures and banks. If theamount is still available to the Company, the Hon’ble Company Court may decide whether someamount - be paid as interest as has also been recommended by the Reserve Bank of India.During the year ended 31st March, 2018, Company started paying the amount as per Phase-Iand Phase-I and is still in continuation for the financial year ending 31st March 2024. However,company has simultaneously started making payment under phase- II of balance 30% to thosewho have claimed the same. During the year 2023-24 company has started making payment of100% to those creditors who are claiming it. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that the issue ofrevival of the company will be decided once all payments are made in the manner as suggestedin the report. The accounts of the company have been prepared on a “going concern” basis onan assumption & premises made by the management that: -
(a) Company earned a net loss of Rs. 93.29 lacs during the year ended March 31,2024 and,as of that date, the Company’s current liabilities exceeded its total assets by Rs 4,609.98lacs. The accumulated loss as on 31st March, 2024 stands to Rs. 9,116.70 lacs - (Previousyear Rs. 9,023.41 lacs/-). As on 31st March, 2024, the Company’s total liabilities exceededto its total assets by Rs. 4,894.48 lacs (Previous year Rs. 4,801.20 lacs).
(b) The Company is not carrying on any business as to comply with the directives of theReserve Bank of India the company ceased to accept deposits from September 1997 andthe company’s application to RBI for certificate of registration (COR) as a NBFC had beenrejected by the RBI in year 2004. The Company contends that the Scheme of One-ManCommittee shall be implemented in full and other aspect of fresh restructuring schemesuch issuance of equity to SBI HOME FINANCE LTD and Pressman Leasing would beapproved/decided upon by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and accordingly the decision onrevival of Company would be taken by Hon’ble Delhi High Court and
(c) Adequate finances and opportunities would be available in the foreseeable future toenable the company to start operating on a profitable basis
37) The Company’s application to RBI for Certificate of Registration (COR) as a NBFC had beenrejected by the RBI in year 2004. The company had made an appeal to the Appellate Authority,Ministry of Finance which directed the RBI to keep its order of rejection of COR in abeyancefor a period of six months and directed the company to file Fresh Restructuring Scheme beforeHon’ble Delhi High Court. RBI has preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble Delhi High Courtagainst the order of the appellate authority, which is still pending. This may be decided upononce scheme of One-Man Committee shall be implemented in full and other aspect of freshrestructuring scheme would be approved/decided upon by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
38) Balance confirmation of security deposits provided, trade receivables, some bank balances,FD balances with bank, rent receivables, other advances, borrowings, balances payable torelated parties and other receivables and payables have not been received from the parties/persons concerned. In the absence of balance confirmations, the closing balances as perbooks of accounts have been incorporated in the financial statements and have been shown,unless otherwise stated by the management about its recoverability in the financials includingconsidering the NPA Provisions, are good for recovery/payment. Time barred debts underthe Limitations Act have not been separately ascertained and written off or provided for. Inthe absence of such confirmation & corresponding reconciliation, it is not feasible for themanagement to determine financial impact on the financial statements and the amount referredas payable/receivables in the financials can differ.
39) Segment information for the year ended 31st March 2024.
The Company is engaged in a single segment i.e. Financing Operations viz., inter corporate depositsand investments. Presently Company is not carrying on any operation except realizing all debtsor maintaining existing assets. The operating results are regularly reviewed and performance isassessed by its Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM). All the company’s resources are dedicatedto this single segment and all the discrete financial information is available for this segment.
‘Return on Equity (ROE) has not been disclosed as both the numerator and denominator are nega¬tive figures in the current financial year.
41) Figures for the previous year have been re-grouped/re-classified wherever necessary to makethem comparable with the figures of the current year.
42) Presentation of Figures
The financial statements are presented in Indian Rupees (INR) which is also the Company’sfunctional currency and all values are rounded to the nearest lakhs, except when otherwiseindicated
For V Sahai Tripathi & Co.
Chartered AccountantsFirm Registration No. 000262N
Vishwas Tripathi Nidhi Deveshwar Richa Kalra Somali Tiwari
Partner Whole Time Director Director Company Secretary
Membership No. 086897 DIN: 09505480 DIN: 07632571 M.No. A-47631
Place : DelhiDated : 28th May, 2024