| ANNUAL REPORT 2005-2006
NOTES ON ACCOUNTS
NOTES ON BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT:
1. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES:
(a) Accounting Convention:
The accounts are prepared under the 'Historical Cost Convention' method.
(b) Basis of Accounting:
The accounts are prepared as per the 'Accrual Basis of Accounting' unless
otherwise stated.
The accounts are prepared on the "Going Concern Basis".
Securities and Exchange Board of India on May 16, 2002 have canceled the
registration of the Company as a Stock Broker. The Company has filed an
appeal before the Security Appellate Tribunal (SAT) against this order.
The Company is a member of the National Stock Exchange of India Limited
(NSE). NSE has declared the Company as defaulter, with effect from May 3,
2002, due to failure of the Company to resolve the investor complaints.
Due to stoppage of the business, the Company has suffered substantial
liquidity problems. Therefore, considering the stoppage of business and the
liquidity problems, the Company's ability to continue is dependent on
vacation of the above order by SAT and/or inflow from receivable.
(c) Revenue Recognition:
(i) Profit/Losses from Share Trading activity is recognised on 'FIFO Cost'
basis on trade dates.
(ii) Dividend income is recognised as and when the right to receive the
dividend is established.
(iii) Lease rental is recognised on due basis depending on the certainty of
recovery.
(d) Investments:
Long term Investments are stated at cost less provision for diminution,
other than temporary, in the value of the investments.
(e) Valuation of Stock-in-trade
Trading Stock of Shares is valued at lower of Cost or Market Value. The
cost is determined on the basis of 'FIFO'.
(f) Fixed Assets:
All the Fixed Assets are stated at Cost less Accumulated Depreciation.
(g) Depreciation:
(i) Depreciation on Fixed Assets is provided on Straight Line Method at the
rates specified in Schedule XIV of the Companies Act, 1956.
(ii) Depreciation on Fixed Assets purchased/sold during the year is
provided on a pro-rata basis with reference to the number of days.
(h) Retirement Benefits:
The Company contributes to the employees' provident fund maintained under
the provident fund scheme by the Central Government. The Contribution made
is charged to Profit & Loss Account.
Company had taken a Group Gratuity Policy from the Life Insurance
Corporation (LIC) of India for payment of Gratuities. The premium payment
is charged to Profit & Loss Account.
All the Employees of the Company have resigned.
The Company does not have any other retirement benefit scheme.
(i) Preliminary Expenditure:
Preliminary Expenditure is being written off over a period of ten years.
(j) Foreign Currency Transactions:
(a) The transactions in foreign currency are recorded at the rate of
exchange prevailing on the date of transaction.
(b) All the monetary foreign currency assets are restated at the rate on
the cut-off date and the difference arising on such restatement is charged
to profit & loss account.
2. National Stock Exchange of India Limited and National Securities
Clearing Corporation Limited have declared the Company as defaulter due to
failure of the Company to resolve the investor complaints filed against the
Company with effect from May 3, 2002.
3. The Securities and Exchange Board of India have, vide order dated May
16,2002, canceled the registration of the Company as a Stock Broker. The
Company has filed an appeal before the Honourable Security Appellate
Tribunal (SAT) against this order.
4. Income-tax department had searched the office premises of the Company on
March 23,2001. Subsequently, the Income-tax Department had appointed
auditor for carrying out audit u/s.142 (2A) for the period from 01.04.1995
to 23.03.2001. The Audits for all the years is over and the reports are
submitted. The Department has assessed the total undisclosed income at
Rs.991.8 crores by treating the client's sales as our income. The total
demand raised is Rs. 680.85 crores. The Company has disputed the demand in
appeal before the Mumbai High Court and also filed miscellaneous
application before income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) after the ITAT and
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has sustained the demand. The Company
is legally advised that they have a good case and accordingly, no further
provision is required, and hence, no provision is made in the accounts.
5. (a) Debtors includes amount receivable from following parties under the
same management as defined under section 370(1-B).
NAME OF THE COMPANIES AS AT AS AT
31ST MARCH, 31ST MARCH,
2006 2005
1. (i) Niyosi Trading & Investment
Private Limited. 33,975,570/- 33,975,570/-
(b) Loans and advances includes loans and advances given to the following
companies under the same management as defined under section 370(1-B):
NAME OF THE COMPANIES AS AT AS AT
31ST MARCH, 31ST MARCH,
2006 2005
1. Niyosi Trading & Investment
Pvt. Ltd. (Maximum amount outstanding
Rs. 15,000,000/-) 15,000,000 15,000,000
2. Moneshi Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.
(Maximum amount outstanding
Rs. 22,500,000/-) 22,500,000 22,500,000
3. Moncon Investments Limited
(Maximum amount outstanding
Rs.12,500,000/-) 12,500,000 12,500,000
4. Triumph Retail Broking
Services Limited (Maximum amount
outstanding Rs. 6,500/-) 6,500 6,500
6. As on 31.3.2001 Rs. 253.71 crores was receivable from Classic Credit
Limited ('CCL') a Company in which two of the Directors of the Company, who
resigned on 31.3.2001, were interested. CCL and its associates disputed the
amounts payable by them on various grounds. After several meetings, when
the disputes could not be resolved, the matter was referred to panel of
three Arbitrators. The Arbitrators had given the final award dated
29.9.2001 ('the Award'), which was accepted by all the parties. The amount
receivable from CCL on 1.03.2006 is Rs 202 crores.
As per the Arbitration Award the CCL has to pay Rs. 190 crores to the
Company in full and final settlement of all their dues to the Company.
Since CCL had failed to make payment as prescribed in the Award for the 1st
installment due on 30th June 2002 due to attachment of its property by Debt
Recovery Tribunal and Income-tax Department, the Company rescheduled the
installment payment in a manner that the payment shall commence from 30th
December 2005. CCL has informed the Company that the DRT has not yet
vacated the attachment on its property and accordingly, they will not be
able to pay the Company as per the agreed schedule and requested the
Company to postpone the commencement of installment payment at least by one
more year. The Company has accepted the request of CCL. As a result the
first installment from CCL will fall due on 30th December, 2006. The
Company is hopeful of recovering the full amount.
The Company has not received delivery of shares from CCL towards certain
shares sold by them through the Company. As a result the Company was not
able to give deliveries of the same to the clients who had purchased the
same through the Company. The balances of debtors and creditors do not
include effect of claims for deliveries. Due to oversight 2 items were
missed out to be included in the list of deliveries not received from CCL.
CCL has amended the list to include that item and considered such revised
list to be the annexure A referred to in the Award.
According to the Arbitration Award, CCL has to give the delivery of all the
shares, a list of which is attached to the award, within one year from the
date of the Arbitration Award, i.e. before 29.9.2002. However, CCL has
still not given the delivery of these shares due to attachment of their
property by Debt Recovery Tribunal and income-tax department. The Company
is confident to receive the delivery of shares on the vacation of
DRT/Income-tax order.
During the year 2003-04 certain clients to whom the delivery of shares were
not given had reversed their purchase transaction at the prevailing market
price of the respective shares. Accordingly, we had credited the accounts
of the clients and debited CCL account with the sales consideration amount
of Rs. 18.11 crores. CCL has confirmed their liability to pay this amount
in addition to and separate from the amounts specified in the Arbitration
Award. Consequently, the list of shares for which delivery is not received
is further revised to the extent of reversal of transactions stated above.
The Company is liable to give delivery of shares to the clients purchasing
them irrespective of the fact whether CCL gives the delivery or not. Total
delivery not made by the Company calculated at the prevailing market rates
of the respective shares on 31.3.2006 was Rs. 114.99 crores and on
15.06.2006 was Rs 105.43 crores.
7. The Department of Company Affairs (DCA) had ordered inspection of books
of accounts and other statutory records of the Company u/s 209A of the
Companies Act, 1956. On the basis of certain findings during the course of
above inspection, the Registrar of Companies-Maharashtra has, on
11.04.2002, filed complaint in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Mumbai against the Company, its Directors, Ex-Directors and Ex-
Company Secretary of the Company. According to the Company, they have not
violated any of the provisions as alleged. However, to avoid litigation,
the Company and the executive Directors have filed petition u/s 621A of the
Companies Act, for compounding of alleged violation. All the violations
have been compounded except violations u/s 383 and 297. No liability for
the compounding fees in above two cases is provided in the accounts, as the
same is not ascertainable.
8. In the month of July 2003 Department of Company Affairs, Delhi (DCA)
filed a Petition under section 237(b) of the companies Act, 1956 before
Company Law Board (CLB) for seeing permission to investigate the Affairs of
the Company. After several appearances and representation, CLB passed an
order granting permission to Investigate affairs of the Company.
Company challenged this order before the High Court Mumbai, on the ground
that Section 237 is not applicable to the Company as business affairs of
the Company have already been closed due to the order passed by the SEBI.
However, the High Court dismiss the Company's appeal. Later on Company
approached to the Division Bench of High Court Mumbai on the same ground,
however Division bench also turned down the Company's appeal.
During the year, the serious fraud investigating agency commenced
investigation of affairs of the Company.
9. M/s. European Investments Limited (EIL) has filed criminal complaint, on
14.05.2002, with the Economic Offence Wing (EOW) of the Mumbai police for
recovery of Rs. 83.22 crores for non-delivery of shares. The EOW has
registered FIR against directors of the Company for various charges under
Indian Penal Code. EOW had searched the premises of the Company on
15.05.2002 in this connection and had seized the Minutes Book of Meeting of
the Board of Directors and Shareholders. They have not yet released the
Minutes book.
EIL had earlier filed a complaint with National Stock Exchange of India
Limited for recovery of Rs. 70.71 crores from the Company. During the ear
the Company has made the payment of Rs. 16.06 crores to EIL. With this the
Company has made a total payment of Rs. 27.O7crores & balance amount
payable to EIL on 31.03.2006 is Rs 43.64 crores. This amount is included in
Sundry Creditors.
The Company do not expect any further liability on final order of the
Court.
The Company had entered into settlement with EIL on 29th January 2002 and
had agreed to pay the dues in 9 equal monthly installments of Rs. 7.86
crores each commencing from 7th April, 2002. The said settlement was
recorded in the form of consent terms and was filed in the court. The
Company along with its Managing Director and two Ex-Director and Classic
Credit Limited (CCL) had signed the consent terms. In ocarinas with the
consent terms the cheques were issued to the EIL by one of the Ex-Director
of the Company. However due to the attachment of the bank account by the
Income Tax Department, and order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT)
restraining the Ex-Director from operating any account or disposing any
assets, he cheques were returned.
Subsequently the EIL had filed the Contempt petition against the Company,
its Managing Director and two Ex-Directors for action under the Contempt of
Courts Act in the Bombay High Court. The Bombay High Court on 5th March
2004 passed the order whereby they discharged the notice issued to two
Managing Directors of the Company and ordered the Company, CCL and two Ex-
Directors to pay all the dues payable in terms of the consent terms within
the period of twelve months. Subsequently in response to the application
filed by CCL the Bombay High Court had directed CCL to make payment of Rs.
2 crores per month for May, June and July 2004 and Rs. 1 crore per month
from August 2004 onwards.
10. The Economic Offence Wing (EOW) of the Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI), Mumbai had searched the office premises of the Company on 12th
November 2003 in connection with the preferential allotment of 2 crore
shares made by Padmini Polymers Limited in May/June 1999. The Company and
its Directors along with other 30 parties were alleged for commission of
various offences relating to cheating and forgery under Indian Penal Code
and P.C. Act 1988. The Company do not expect any further liability on the
final order of the court.
11. The Company had given post dated cheques aggregating to Rs.5.45 crores
to M/s. Ashok Mittal & Company as advance towards intended purchase from
them. M/s. Ashok Mittal & Company presented the cheque even though the
transaction was never entered which left Company no option but to instruct
for stop payment to Company's bank and the same were dishonoured. The party
has filed Criminal Complaint u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act,
with Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai on 17.01.2001 and re-
notified on 22.08.2002. The Company do not expect any liability on final
order by the Court.
12. The Global Trust Bank Limited has filed an application with the Debt
Recovery Tribunal ('DRT'), on 06.08.2003 for recovery of Rs. 46.76 crores.
The DRT has passed an interim order imposing a temporary injunction from
transferring/selling/creating any third party rights, disposing off or
dealing with any of the Company's assets by the Company. The Global Trust
Bank Limited/stopped providing for the interest on the above loan from
01.04.2001. However, the Company has provided the interest of Rs. 7.95
crores or the current year.
13. In view of large demand of Rs. 345.29 crores for Assessment Year 1998-
99, Rs. 205.56 crores for Assessment Year 1999-2000 and Rs. 680.85 crores
for the Block Period from 01.04.95 to 23.03.2001, the Assessing Officer had
passed order u/s 281 B of the Income tax Act, 1961 dated 31.10.2001 for
provisional attachment of the fixed assets and the credit balance lying in
the bank accounts. The order was again renewed on 09.04.2002, 16.10.2002 &
07.04.2003. Subsequently, the Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) has also sent
notice u/s. 226(3) of the income-tax Act, 1961 to certain debtors, banks
and associate concerns of the Company restraining them from making payments
to the Company and requiring them to make payment to the Income-tax
Department. As per the information available with the Company, the TRO has
collected Rs. 3.03 crores from banks and debtors of the Company. The exact
amount collected by the TRO from the debtors etc. is not available.
The Company has received letter dated 30.06.2004 from one of the debtor
M.Jigar & Co. informing that they have made payment of Rs. 34.32 lacs to
the TRO. Accordingly, the debtors account is credited and Income tax
payment account (included in Loans & Advances Schedule) is debited by that
amount. The Company had requested the TRO for the confirmation of above
transaction but has not received the same.
The Company had deposited a Pay Order relating to refund of stamp duty of
Rs. 2.93 crores in the Madhavpura Mercantile Co-Op. Bank Limited on 28th
June 2002. The bank has not given credit for the amount as the Income-tax
department has directly attached and recovered this amount from Reserve
Bank of India. The Company has not received instrument back from the
Madhavpura Bank. The amount lying with Income-tax department is shown as
advances recoverable in the Loans and Advances Schedule.
14. The Company along. with its subsidiaries had entered into an agreement
with ICICI Limited for acquiring ICICI premises at Churchgate, Mumbai. The
Company as one of the co-owners had paid Rs.3 crores there of as Earnest
Money.
The Debt Recovery Tribunal ("DRT") had passed an order in the case of one
of the director of the Company, who had resigned from directorship on
31.3.2001, imposing a temporary injunction on all the properties owned by
or belonging to them. The entire ICICI property, including the portion
acquired by the Company, has been wrongly included in the list of
properties owned by or belonging to such directors and therefore ICICI
Limited had refused to refund the Earnest Money till final outcome of DRT
proceedings.
As a result of DRT order the ICICI Limited has paid the entire amount of
Rs. 3.00 crores to Bank of India. The Bank of India has informed us that
they have received Rs.3.32 crores on 23.08.2002 from ICICI Limited and they
had kept the said sum in the deposit account carrying interest at the rate
of 8% p.a.. They have credited the said sum along with interest of Rs.23.71
lacs making the total to Rs.3.56 crores to the account of Panther
Investrade Limited. Therefore, we have shown the amount as recoverable from
Panther Investrade Limited and are included under the head "Current Assets
Loans & Advances".
15. Balances reflected in the accounts of Sundry Debtors, Loans and
Advances, Secured Loans and Sundry Creditors are subject to confirmation/
reconciliation, and consequential adjustments, if any.
16. Despite of several reminders, The National Stock Exchange of India
Limited (NSE), has not furnished the details of Interest credited, deposits
lying with them and list of investor complaints against the Company.
17. (a) The Securities and Exchange Board of India has, vide order dated
24th August 2004 levying penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- each in case of
Silverline Technologies Ltd. and SSI Ltd. u/s. 15-A & 15-HB of SEBI Act.
(b) The Securities and Exchange Board of India has, vide order dated 28th
April 2003 levying penalty of Rs.6,50,000/- each in case of Shonk
Technologies Ltd. and Aftek Infosys Ltd. u/s. 15-J & 15-A(a) & 15-A(b) of
SEBI Act.
18. Loans and Advances include Rs. 4 crores paid to an Ex-Director towards
purchase of shares under an option agreement. The Company has decided not
to exercise the option, However, Debt Recovery Tribunal has passed an order
attaching the properties of the ex-director and accordingly, he is not able
to refund the money to the Company. However, the Company is confident that
as soon as the order is vacated by the DIRT, the ex-Director will refund
the money to the Company.
19. (a) Previous years figures have been regrouped, re-arranged and/or
recasted wherever considered necessary.
(b) Figures have been rounded off to the nearest rupee
20. Quantitative and value wise details in respect of opening stock,
purchases, sales and closing stock of each of the items:
PARTICULARS OPENING PURCHASES SALES CLOSING
STOCK STOCK
SECURITIES
(A) SHARES
1. Quantity
2005-2006 120,372 - - 120,372
2004-2005 120,372 - - 120,372
2. In Value (In Rs.):
2005-2006 525,169 - - 541,597
2004-2005 4,324,965 - - 525,169
21. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES:
Contingent liabilities in respect of:
(In Rs.)
AS AT AS AT
31ST MARCH, 31ST MARCH,
2006 2005
(a) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 1997-98 disputed in appeal before
Income Tax Appellant Tribunal (ITAT) The
Company is legally advised that they have
a good case and accordingly, no further
provision is required, and hence, no
provision is made in the accounts. 11,267,889 11,267,889
(b) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 1998-99 disputed in appeal before
ITAT. The Company is legally advised
that they have a good case and
accordingly, no further provision is
required, and hence, no provision is
made in the accounts. 36,444,545 36,444,545
(c) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 1999-2000 disputed in appeal before
ITAT. The Company is legally advised that
they have a good case and accordingly,
no further provision is require and
hence, no provision made in the accounts. 711,727,808 711,727,808
(d) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 2000-2001 disputed in appeal before
ITAT. The Company is legally advised that
they have a good case and accordingly, no
further provision is required, and hence,
no provision is made in the accounts. 25,998,605 25,998,605
(e) Income Tax demand for the Block
Period disputed in appeal before
Bombay High Court. The Company is legally
advised that they have a good case and
accordingly, no further provision is
required, and hence, no provision is
made in the accounts. 6,808,456,071 6,808,456,071
(f) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 2001-2002 disputed in appeal before
CIT(A). The Company is legally advised
that they have a good case and
accordingly, no further provision is
required, and hence, no provision is made
in the accounts. 93,829,137 93,829,137
(g) The Company has received order dated
30.7.04 passed by CIT (Appeals) confirming
levy of penalty u/s. 271 D & 271 E of
Income-tax Act, 1961 for violation of
section 269SS & 269T respectively. The
Company has disputed the levy of penalty
before the Hon. ITAT. The Company is
legally advised that they have a good
case and accordingly, no further
provision is required, and hence, no
provision is made in the accounts. 4,20,00,000 4,20,00,000
(h) The Company has received order dated
28.3.05 passed by ACIT. Relating to A.Y.
2000-01, levying penalty u/s.271(1)(c).
The Company has disputed the levy of
penalty before the CIT (Appeals). The
Company is legally advised that they have
a good case and accordingly, no further
provision is required, and hence, no
provision is made in the accounts. 1,40,91,450 1,40,91,450
(i) The Company has received assessment
orders dated 30.3.05 reducing the returned
losses relating to A.Y. 2002-03. The
Company has disputed the assessment and
demand raised before the CIT (Appeals).
The Company is legally advised that they
have a good case and accordingly, no
further provision is required, and hence,
no provision is made in the accounts. Nil NIL
(j) Income Tax demand for the assessment
year 2003-2004 disputed in appeal before
CIT(A). The Company is legally advised
that they have a good case and
accordingly, no further provision is
required, and hence, no provision is made
in the accounts. 36,185 -
(k) The Company has received order
dated 21.03.2006 levying of penalty
u/s. 271 E of Income-tax Act, 1961 for
violation of section 269T for A.Y
2003-2004. The Company has disputed the
levy of penalty before CIT(Appeals). The
Company is legally advised that they have
a good case and accordingly, no further
provision is required, and hence, no
provision is made in the accounts. 4,28,99,325 -
(l) The Company has received orders dated
28.3.05 u/s.163 of Income-tax Act, 1961
considering the Company to be agent of the
Overseas Clients. The Company has disputed
status as an agent before the CIT(Appeals).
The Company is legally advised that they
have a good case. Further, the final
liability, if any is also not ascertained
by the Income-tax Department. Accordingly,
no further provision is made in the
accounts. Not Ascertained -
(m) Bank and other Guarantees 50,000,000 50,000,000
(n) Collateral Corporate Guarantees 321,000,000 321,000,000
(o) Certain clients have initiated
proceeding u/s. 138 of the Negotiable
Instrument act against the Company and
its directors. However, the company
does not expect any additional liability
on final disposal of such cases. See Note - 11 See Note - 11
(p) Complaint relating to Padmini
Polymers Ltd. shares See Note - 10 See Note - 10
(q) Non delivery of shares See Note - 6 See Note - 6
(r) Compounding fees See Note - 7 See Note - 7
(s) Complaint by European Investment See Note - 9 See Note - 9
(t) Claims not acknowledge as debt 100,000 100,000
(u) Unclaimed interest on Bonds and
Debentures written back 1,457,961 1,457,961
(v) The Company has received order
dated April 28, 2003from SEBI levying
penalty u/s. 15J, 15A(a) & 15A(b) of
SEBI Act in case of Shonkh Technologies
Ltd. and Aftek Infosys Ltd. The
Company is legally advised that they
have a good case and accordingly, no
further provision is required, and
hence, no provision is made in the
accounts. 13,50,000 13,50,000
(w) The Company has received order
dated August 24, 2004 from SEBI
levying penalty u/s. 15-I of SEBI Act
in case of SSI Ltd./Silverline. The
Company is legally advised that they
have a good case and prefer an appeal
before Securities Appellate Tribunal
(SAT) accordingly, no further
provision is require and hence, no
provision is made in the accounts. 2,00,000 2,00,000
22. The Company mainly operated as a broker on National Stock Exchange of
India Limited. The assets and liabilities of the Company mainly belonged to
broking business only. During the year no broking business was carried out.
Therefore, there were no segment wise details to be reported.
23. The timing differences in tax calculations of the Company up to
31.03.2006 resulted into Deferred tax Asset of Rs. 45.56 crores and current
year loss results into further deferred tax Asset of Rs.3.21 crores.
However, no such asset is created, as there is no virtual certainty about
recovery of the same.
24. In view of financial problems, the Company has not been able to appoint
a Company Secretary.
25. There were no outstanding balances payable to any small scale
Industrial undertaking.
26. Details of closing stock of Securities (As Certified and verified by
the Management):
Name of the Scrip As At 31st March, 2006 As At 31st March, 2005
(A) SHARES QTY. AMT.(Rs.) QTY. AMT.(Rs.)
1. HDFC Bank 50 8,045 50 8,045
2. Karnataka Chemicals 10,000 - 10,000 -
3. Lord Krishna Bank 2,500 30,000 2,500 30,000
4. Nirma Ltd. 472 241,640 472 150,332
5. Rashel Agrotech
Limited 72,000 211,680 72,000 286,560
6. Samudra Shoes Ltd. 5000 - 5000 -
7. TISCO LTd. 350 50,232 350 50,232
8. Unified Agro Ltd. 30,000 - 30,000 -
TOTAL (A) 120,372 541,597 120,372 525,169
27. Related Party Transactions:
(A). The list of related parties and nature of their relationship is
furnished below:
(a) Subsidiaries:
(i) Triumph Retail Broking Services Limited 98% Subsidiary
(ii) International Holding (Triumph) Limited 100% Subsidiary
(b) Directors\Key Management Personnel:
(i) Mr. Jatin R. Sarvaiya Managing Director
(ii) Dharmesh H Doshi Non-Executive Director
(iii) Mr. A. R. Kapadia Non-Executive Director
(c) Companies in which Directors are interested:
(i) Moncon Investments Limited
(ii) Moneshi Consultancy Private Limited
(iii) Moncon Exports Private Limited
(iv) Mividha Investments Private Limited
(v) Niyosi Trading & Investments Private Limited
(vi) Saj Securities Pvt. Limited
(vii) Triumph Finsec (Bangalore) Limited
(viii) Triumph Securities (Indore) Limited
(ix) Triumph Securities (Pune) limited
(x) Triumph Securities (Vadodara) Pvt. Limited
(xi) Triumph Finsec (Valsad) Limited
(B) Transactions with and outstanding balances of related parties are
furnished below:
Particular A B C D E
Prior Period
Income - - NIL NIL -
(900,000) (900,000)
Balance
Written
Back NIL - - NIL -
(13,80,709) (13,80,709)
Investments
in Shares (NIL) - - (NIL) 51,204,300
(NIL) - - (NIL) (53,704,300)
Provision for (2,500,000) - NIL (2,500,000) 43,104,500
diminution in (300,000) - NIL (300,000) (45,604,500)
value of
Investments
(net of
w/back)
Security
Deposit for - - - - 50,000,000
Business - - - - (50,000,000)
Service
Debtors - - NIL NIL 33,975,570
NIL NIL (33,975,570)
Amount Payable NIL - NIL NIL 5,739,000
NIL - (643,500) (643,500) (5,739,000)
Loans\ICD
given NIL - NIL NIL 6,500
(2,500) (NIL) (2,500) (6,500)
A - Subsidiaries
B - Directors
C - Relatives of Directors/firms and companies in which directors are
interested
D - Total
E - Outstanding Balance as on 31.3.2006 (31.3.2005)
Note: There are no associates and no joint ventures
28. MANAGERIAL REMUNERATION:
PARTICULARS YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
31ST MARCH, 2006 31ST MARCH, 2005
(a) Salaries NIL NIL
(b) Contribution to provident fund NIL NIL
TOTAL NIL NIL
AS per SECTION II of Part II of Schedule XIII of the Companies Act, 1956,
the approval of Remuneration Committee is required. However, no such
Remuneration committee is formed. As a result, remuneration of Rs.2.24
lakhs paid during the year ending on 31.3.2004 was subject to the approval
of Central Government. In case the same is not approved by the Central
Government, the amount is liable to be refunded to the Company. The Company
has not yet made application to the Central Government.
29. AUDITORS' REMUNERATION:
Auditors' Remuneration included in the Profit and Loss Account includes:
(In Rs.)
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
31ST MARCH, 31ST MARCH,
2006 2005
As Audit Fees*:
(i) Statutory Audit 40,000 40,000
(ii) Tax Audit 10,000 10,000
TOTAL 50,000 50,000
* Excluding service tax
30. Triump Forex Services P. Ltd., one of the subsidiary of the Company had
credit balance and interest thereon totaling to Rs. 12,77,026 with The
Madhavpura Mercantile Co. Op. Bank Ltd. The Company has requested the bank
to adjust above credit against the dues from the Company. Accordingly, the
Company has debited the account of The Madhavpura Mercantile Co. Op. Bank
Ltd. with the above amount and credited the same to the account of Triumph
Forex Services P. Ltd. However, the bank has not confirmed the above
transaction and therefore above recording is subject to confirmation by the
bank.
31. Prior period Expenses of Rs. 63,30,983 included in Schedule-J includes
the following
Amount (Rs.)
Income NIL
Expenses:
Interest Payable 63,30,983
32. Information pursuant to Part II of Schedule VI of the Companies Act,
1956 are given to the extent they are applicable to the Company.
AS PER OUR REPORT OF EVEN DATE ATTACHED HEREWITH
FOR PRAVIN P. SHAH & COMPANY
CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS
PARAG P. DOSHI
PARTNER
Place: Mumbai
Date : 30th June 2006
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
JATIN SARVAIYA A. R. KAPADIA
MANAGING DIRECTOR DIRECTOR
Place: Mumbai
Date : 30th June 2006 |