Home  »  Company  »  Tirupathi Indus  »  Quotes  »  Notes to Account
Enter the first few characters of Company and click 'Go'

Notes to Accounts of Tirupati Industries (India) Ltd.

Mar 31, 2014

1. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES NOT PROVIDED FOR:

a) MSEB CLAIM NOT ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE COMPANY: As per letter dated 15.4.2002 issued by MSEB after mutual discussions, the Company had to receive an amount of Rs 4,308.75 from MSEB. Whereas as per letter dated 15.7.2002, MSEB has demanded that the Company pays an amount of Rs 10,37,605.75/- to mSeb. The Company has asked MSEB to arrive at the correct amount after mutual discussions and as required under the Maharashtra State Government''s order dated 16.11.96. Hon''ble AAIFR vide on order dated 14.12.06 has directed MSEB to implement the order of the State Government dated 16.11.96 & grant the necessary relief to the Company within three weeks from the date of the said order. MSEB approached the Bombay High Court against the order of AAIFR and claimed an amount of Rs.68,80,389/- (Previous Year Rs.68,80,389/-) from the company including interest and penalty upto the date of filing its petition. The Honorable High Court on 4th June, 2008, directed that an amount of Rs 60 Lakhs be placed with mSeb pending the final disposal of the matter. Against this MSEB was required to give a Bank Guarantee to the High Court. In a Petition filed by the co, the Hon''ble Supreme Court directed the High Court to expedite the hearing. Company has approached the Hon''ble High Court for expeditious hearing. In the opinion of the Management, the Company is eligible for various reliefs & concessions as per the package of MSEB.

b) Penalty of Rs.10 Lakhs (Previous Year Rs.10 Lakhs) levied under FERA (Refer Note 4)

2. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, MAHARASHTRA UNDER SECTION 13 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 TO THE COMPANY FOR CARRYING ON ULTRA VIRES ACTIVITIES: The Company had received a show cause notice from Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra for violation of Sec.13 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the period prior to March 1991. The then Managing Director of the Company Mr. Ramniklal Sheth and two other Ex-Directors Mr. B. F. Jhaveri and Mr. C. A. Mehta were carrying on the business in Diamond in the name of the Company. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has concluded that the activities of carrying on such business are ultravires and such opinion is formed after investigation of the records and documents of the Company, under Section 209 A of the Companies Act, 1956.

3. PENALTY OF RS. 10 LAKH IMPOSED BY SPECIAL DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT UNDER FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION ACT, 1973: Office of the Special Director of Enforcement (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) issued show cause notice to the Company and two erstwhile Directors i.e. Mr. R. A. Sheth and Mr. C. A. Mehta for violation of Section 18(2) and 18(3) read with sections 68(1) & (2) of the FERA Act 1973. This violation is for non- realization of the export proceeds. During Feb.1989 to Feb.1990 when erstwhile Directors Mr. R. A. Sheth and Mr. C. A. Mehta were in charge of the affairs of the Company.

The Enforcement Directorate has imposed penalties of Rs.40 Lakhs each on the said two responsible ex-Directors, as they have been found personally responsible for the violation of FERA.

In the opinion of the Director of Enforcement the Company, being a juridical person, is also to be charged although only the above named two ex-directors were personally involved in the violation and there is every possibility that moneys were directly realized by both of them.

The penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed on the Company is contested and matter is pending. No provision is made in accounts as in the opinion of the Directors, the Company is not required to pay penalty.

4. In the opinion of the Board, all of the assets other than fixed assets and non-current investments, have a value on realization in the ordinary course of business at least equal to the amount at which they are stated. The provisions of all known and determined liabilities are adequate and not in excess of the amount reasonably necessary.

5. During the year company has written off total expenditure on development of internally generated brands amounting to Rs. 96,11,107/- (including amount of Rs. 76,84,680/- as carried under the head Intangible Asset under Development till previous year) has been charged to Profit & Loss Account in current year to bring it in consonance with Accounting Standard 26.

6. The company was mainly engaged in the business of manufacturers, processing and trading in vegetable oils and chemicals derived thereof, chemicals and allied products in the year. Therefore, all the operations of the company are considered as single segment for the purpose of As 17 on "Segment Reporting" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

7. In pursuance of AS 28 on impairment of assets issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the company has undertaken summary overview of the assets held by it and is of the view that no asset requires provision for impairment.

8. Disclosure pursuant to Accounting Standard - 15 ''Employee Benefits''

i. Contribution to Provident Fund

The Companies contribution to Statutory Provident Fund is charged to the Statement of Profit and Loss under the head Contribution to Provident Fund is Rs. 2,48,873 /- (P.Y. Rs. 2,03,712/-).

ii. Gratuity / Leave Salary

The Company has few employees hence the actuarial valuation is not viable. The gratuity and leave encashment liability are charged to Profit & Loss Account through accruing liabilities based on the assumption that such benefits are payable to the employees at the end of the accounting year. The Company during the year provided Rs. 3,53,585/- (PY: Rs. 2,03,711/-) towards gratuity and leave salary.

9. The previous year''s figures have been regrouped/re-classified to confirm to this year''s classification.


Mar 31, 2013

1. CONTINGENT LIABILTIES NOT PROVIDED FOR:

a. MSEB dues not acknowledged by the Company since reliefs and concessions given to units referred to BIFR as per the package of the Maharashtra State Government have to be granted to the Company. As per letter dated 15.4.2002 issued by MSEB after mutual discussions, the Company had to receive an amount of Rs 4,308.75 from MSEB. Whereas as per letter dated 15.7.2002, MSEB has demanded that the Company pays an amount of Rs 10,37,605.75 to MSEB. The Company has asked MSEB to arrive at the correct amount after mutual discussions and as required under the Maharashtra State Government''s order dated 16.11.96. Hon''ble AAIFR vide on order dated 14.12.06 has directed MSEB to implement the order of the State Government dated 16.11.96 & grant the necessary relief to the Company within three weeks from the date of the said order. MSEB approached the Bombay High Court against the order of AAIFR and claimed an amount of Rs.68,80,389/- (Previous Year Rs.68,80,389/-) from the company including interest and penalty upto the date of filing its petition. The Honorable High Court on 4th June, 2008, directed that an amount of Rs. 60 Lakhs be placed with MSEB pending the final disposal of the matter. Against this MSEB was required to give a Bank Guarantee to the High Court. In a Petition filed by the Compay, the Hon''ble Supreme Court directed the High Court to expedite the hearing. Company has approached the Hon''ble High Court for expeditious hearing.

b. Penalty of Rs.10 Lakhs (Previous Year Rs.10 Lakhs) levied under FERA (Refer Note 4)

2. The Company''s Factory is now situated at Dheku (Developing Industrial Area). In the opinion of the Management, the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act, 1946 are therefore, not applicable to the Company.

3. Show Cause notice issued by Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra under section 13 of the Companies Act, 1956 to the Company for carrying on ultra vires activities

The Company had received a show cause notice from Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra for violation of Sec.13 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the period prior to March 1991. The then Managing Director of the Company Mr. Ramniklal Sheth and two other Ex- Directors Mr. B. F. Jhaveri and Mr. C.A. Mehta were carrying on the business in Diamond in the name of the Company. The Department of Company Affairs has concluded that the activities of carrying on such business are ultravires and such opinion is formed after investigation of the records and documents of the Company, under Section 209 A of the Companies Act, 1956.

4. Penalty of Rs. 10 Lakhs imposed by Special Director of Enforcement under Foreign Exchange Regulation ACT, 1973. Office of the Special Director of Enforcement (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) issued show cause notice to the Company and two erstwhile Directors i.e. Mr.R.A. Sheth and . Mr.C.A.Mehta for violation of Section 18(2) and 18(3) read with sections 68(1) & (2) of the FERA Act 1973. This violation is for non-realization of the export proceeds of Rs.1.11 crores in respect of export of Diamonds and Rs.64.51 lakhs for export of Methyl Esters during Feb.1989 to Feb.1990 when erstwhile Directors Mr. R.A.Sheth and Mr.C.A.Mehta were in charge of the affairs of the Company.

The Enforcement Directorate has imposed penalties of Rs.40 Lakhs each on the said two responsible ex-Directors as they have been a found personally responsible for the violation of FERA.

In the opinion of the Director of Enforcement the Company, being a juridical person, is also to be charged although only the above named two ex-directors were personally involved in the violation and there is every possibility that moneys were directly realized by both of them. The penalty of Rs.10 lakhs imposed on the Company is contested and matter is pending. No provision is made in accounts as in the opinion of the Directors, the Company is not required to pay penalty.

5. In the opinion of the Board, all of the assets other than fixed assets and non-current investments, have a value on realization in the ordinary course of business at least equal vto the amount at which they are stated. The provisions of all known and determined liabilities are adequate and not in excess of the amount reasonably necessary.

6. In the opinion of the Management, the Company is developing brands for its products which will provide long term future benefits and hence the amount of Rs.76,84,680/- is considered as a Capital Expenditure for Intangible Assets.

7. The Company has licensed out its soap plant to M/s Nova Oleochem Limited an Associate Concern.

8. Appointment of Company Secretary

As required by the provisions of Section 383 A of the Companies Act, 1956, Company has appointed a Whole time Company Secretary with effect from 10th May, 2013.

9. The company is mainly engaged in the business of Manufacturing and Processing Vegetable oil and Allied Products in the year. Therefore all the operations of the Company are considered as single segment for the purpose of As 17 on "Segment Reporting" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

10.. In pursuance of AS 28 on impairment of assets issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the company has undertaken summary overview of the assets held by it and is of the view that no asset requires provision for impairment.

11. Current Tax

The taxable income of the Company being lower than the book profit as per the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Company has provided for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) on its income.

Deferred Tax

The Company has made provision for net deferred asset in respect of eligible unabsorbed losses/depreciation as it is confident of generating sufficient future income based on its future plans. The net deferred tax assets including related credit on the long term capital loss and business losses prior to last eight assessment years have not been recognized in these accounts on the prudent basis. This is in accordance with Accounting Standard 22 "Accounting for Taxes on Income" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

Mat Credit Entitlement

The Company has made provision for MAT Credit Entitlement in respect of MAT payments in earlier years as it is confident of generating sufficient future income based on its future plans. MAT Credit Entitlement amounting to Rs.52,71,878/- (Previous Year – Nil) has been recognized during the year.

12. Disclosure pursuant to Accounting Standard – 15 ''Employee Benefits''

i. Contribution to Provident Fund

The Companies contribution to Statutory Provident Fund is charged to the Statement of Profit and Loss under the head Contribution to Provident Fund is Rs.2,03,612 /-(PY Rs. 59,898/-).

ii. Gratuity / Leave Salary

The gratuity and leave encashment liability are charged to Profit & Loss Account through accruing liabilities based on the assumption that such benefits are payable to the employees at the end of the accounting year. The Company during the year provided Rs. 71,019/- (PY: Rs. 53,712/-) towards gratuity and Rs.1,32,692/- (PY: Rs.80,765/-) towards leave salary.

13. The company has accounted for remunerations paid to temporary staff under the head Temporary staff expenses / Sales promotion expenses. No retirement benefits have been provided on the same as none of the employees are eligible for same.

14. The previous year''s figures have been regrouped/re-classified to confirm to this year''s classification.


Mar 31, 2012

Under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, certain disclosures are required to be made relating to dues to Micro, Small and Medium enterprises. Based on the information available with the Company, there are no parties who have been identified as micro, small and medium enterprises based on the confirmations circulated and responses received by the management.

1. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES NOT PROVIDED FOR:

a. MSEB dues not acknowledged by the Company since reliefs and concessions given to units referred to BIFR as per the package of the Maharashtra State Government have to be granted to the Company. As per letter dated 15.4.2002 issued by MSEB after mutual discussions, the Company had to receive an amount of Rs 4,308.75 from MSEB. Whereas as per letter dated 15.7.2002, MSEB has demanded that the Company pays an amount of Rs 10,37,605.75 to MSEB. The Company has asked MSEB to arrive at the correct amount after mutual discussions and as required under the Maharashtra State Government's order dated 16.11.96. Hon'ble AAIFR vide on order dated 14.12.06 has directed MSEB to implement the order of the State Government dated 16.11.96 & grant the necessary relief to the Company within three weeks from the date of the said order. MSEB approached the Bombay High Court against the order of AAIFR and claimed an amount of Rs.68,80,389/ - (Previous Year Rs.68,80,389/-) from the company including interest and penalty upto the date of filing its petition. The Honorable High Court on 4th June, 2008, directed that an amount of Rs 60 Lakhs be placed with MSEB pending the final disposal of the matter. Against this MSEB was required to give a Bank Guarantee to the High Court. In a Petition filed by the co, the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed the High Court to expedite the hearing. Company has approached the Hon'ble High Court for expeditious hearing.

b. Penalty of Rs.10 Lakhs (Previous Year Rs.10 Lakhs) levied under FERA(R efer to Note 4)

2. The Company's Factory is now situated at Dheku (Developing Industrial Area). In the opinion of the Management, the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act, 1946 are therefore, not applicable to the Company.

3. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, MAHARASHTRA UNDER SECTION 13 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 TO THE COMPANY FOR CARRYING ON ULTRA VIRES ACTIVITIES

The Company had received a show cause notice from Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra for violation of Sec.13 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the period prior to March 1991. The then Managing Director of the Company Mr. Ramniklal Sheth and two other other Ex- Directors Mr. B. F. Jhaveri and Mr. C.A. Mehta were carrying on the business in Diamond in the name of the Company. The Department of Company Affairs has concluded that the activities of carrying on such business are ultravires and such opinion is formed after investigation of the records and documents of the Company, under Section 209 A of the Compa nies Act, 1956.

4. PENALTY OF RS.10 LAKH IMPOSED BY SPECIAL DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT UNDER FOREIGN EXCHANGE REGULATION ACT, 1973.

Office of the Special Director of Enforcement (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) issued show cause notice to the Company and two erstwhile Directors i.e. Mr.R.A. Sheth and . Mr.C.A.Mehta for violation of Section 18(2) and 18(3) read with sections 68(1) & (2) of the FERA Act 1973. This violation is for non-realization of the export proceeds of Rs.1.11 crores in respect of export of Diamonds and Rs.64.51 lakhs for export of Methyl Esters during Feb.1989 to Feb. 1990 when erstwhile Directors Mr. R.A.Sheth and Mr.C.A.Mehta were in charge of the affairs of the Company. The Enforcement Directorate has imposed penalties of Rs.40 Lakhs each on the s aid two responsible ex-Directors as they have been a found personally responsible for the violation of FERA.

In the opinion of the Director of Enforcement the Company, being a juridical person, is also to be charged although only the above named two ex-directors were personally involved in the violation and there is every possibility that moneys were directly realized by both of them.

The penalty of Rs.10 lakhs imposed on the Company is contested and matter is pending. No provision is made in accounts as in the opinion of the Directors, the Company is not required to pay penalty.

5. The Company has been discharged from the purview of SICA by Hon'ble BIFR vide an order dated 12 th May 2011.

6 In the opinion of the Board, all of the assets other than fixed assets and non-current investments, have a value on realization in the ordinary course of business at least equal to the amount at which they are stated. The provisions of all known and determined liabilities are adequate and not in excess of the amount reasonably necessary.

7 Debtors, Creditors and loans & Advances, deposits & other accounts are subject to confirmations and reconciliation. Consequential adjustment thereof, if any, will be given effect into the books of accounts in the year of such adjustment.

8. The Company has licensed out its soap plant to M/s Nova Oleochem Ltd., an associate Concern.

9. Appointment of Company Secretary

The financial statements have not been authenticated by a Company secretary as required by the provisions of Section 215 (2A) of the Act as the Company is in the process of the appointing a whole time company secretary as required by the provisions of Section 383 A of the Act.Compliance Certificate by practicing Company Secretary has been obtained by the Company for Financial Year 2011 - 2012.

10. The company was mainly engaged in the business of Manufacturing and Processing in Vegetable oil and Allied Products in the year. Therefore all the operation s of the company are considered as single segment for the purpose of As 17 on "Segment Reporting" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

11. In pursuance of AS 28 on impairment of assets issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the company has undertaken summary overview of the assets held by it and is of the view that no asset requires provision for impairment.

12. CURRENT TAX

The taxable income of the company being lower than the book profit as per the Income Tax Act, 1961, the company has provided for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) on its income. MAT credit entitlement has not been carried forward as a matter of prudence.

DEFERRED TAX

The Company has substantial unabsorbed depreciation and carried forward business losses and long term capital loss under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The part of these losses pertains the period prior to eligible eight year period which has been carried forward pursuant to the application made by the company to the Director General of Income Tax (Administrator), New Delhi on 11/09/1996, for exemption from applicability from Section 72 of the Income Tax Act,1961, as per the recommendation of the BIFR while sanctioning the reh abilitation scheme. The application is still pending before the concerned authority.

The Company has made provision for net deferred asset in respect of eligible unabsorbed losses/depreciation as it is confident of generating sufficient future income based on its future plans. The net deferred tax assets including related credit on the long term capital loss and business losses prior to last eight assessment years have not been recognized in these accounts on the prudent basis. This is in accordance with AccountingStandard22"Accounting forTaxesonIncome" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

13. Disclosure pursuant to Accounting Standard - 15 'Employee Benefits'

i. Contribution to Provident Fund

The Companies contribution to Statutory Provident Fund is charged to the Statement of Profit and Loss under the head Contribution to Provident Fund is Rs.59,898/-(PY Rs. 44,736/-).

ii. Gratuity / Leave Salary

The gratuity and leave encashment liability are charged to Profit & Loss Account through accruing liabilities based on the assumption that such benefits are payable to the employees at the end of the accounting year. The Company during the year provided Rs. 53,712/-(PY: Rs. 27,695/-) towards gratuity and Rs.80,765/- (PY: Rs.90,001/ -) towards leave salary.

The Company has accounted for payments to temporary staff under the head Temporary staff Expenses/Sales Promotions expenses. No retirement benefits have been provided on the same as none of the employees are eligible for the same.

14. The financial statements for the year ended 31st March, 2011 have been prepared as per than applicable, Pre -revised Schedule VI to the Act. Consequent to the notification of revised Schedule VI, the financial statements for the year ended 31st March, 2012 have been prepared as per revised Schedule VI an d accordingly the previous year's figures have also been regrouped/re-classified to confirm to this year's classification. The adoption of revised Schedule VI for the previous year does not impact recognition and measurement principal followed in preparation of financial statement, however it significantly impacts the presentation and disclosures made in financial statements.


Mar 31, 2011

1. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES NOT PROVIDED FOR:

a. MSEB dues not acknowledged by the Company since reliefs and concessions given to units referred to BIFR as per the package of the Maharashtra State Government have to be granted to the Company. As per letter dated 15.4.2002 issued by MSEB after mutual discussions, the Company had to receive an amount of Rs 4308.75 from MSEB. Whereas as per letter dated 15.7.2002, MSEB has demanded that the Company pays an amount of Rs 1037605.75 to MSEB. The Company has asked MSEB to arrive at the correct amount after mutual discussions and as required under the Maharashtra State Government''s order dated 16.11.96. Hon''ble AAIFR videon order dated 14.12.06 has directed MSEB to implement the order of the State Government dated 16.11.96 & grant the necessary relief to the Company within three weeks from the date of the said order. MSEB approached the Bombay High Court against the order of AAIFR and claimed an amount of Rs.68,80,389 from the company including interest and penalty upto the date of filing its petition. The Hon able High Court on 4th June, 2008, directed that an amount of Rs 60 Lakhs be placed with MSEB pending the final disposal of the matter. Against this MSEB was required to give a Bank Guarantee to the High Court. In a Petition filedby the co, the Hon able Supreme Court directed to the High Court to expedite the hearing.

b. Penalty of Rs. 10 Lakhs (Previous Year Rs. 10 Lakhs) levied under FERA (Refer Note No.5)

2. The Company''s Factory is now situated at Dheku (Developing Industrial Area). In the Opinion of the Management, the provisions of Employees State Insurance Act, 1946 are therefore, note applicable to the Company.

3. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, MAHARASHTRA UNDER SECTION 13 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 TO THE COMPANY FOR CARRYING ON ULTRA VIRES ACTIVITIES

The Company had received a show cause notice from Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra for violation of Sec. 13 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the period prior to March 1991. The then Managing Director of the Company Mr. Ramniklal Sheth and two other other Ex- Directors Mr. B. F. Jhaveri and Mr. C.A. Mehta were carrying on the business in Diamond in the name of the Company. The Department of Company Affairs has concluded that the activities of carrying on such business is ultravires and such opinion is formed after investigation of the records and documents of the Company, under Section 209 A of the Companies Act, 1956.

4. PENALTY OF RS.10 LAKH IMPOSED BY SPECIAL DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT UNDER FOREIGN EXCHAGE REGULATION ACT, 1973.

Office of the Special Director of Enforcement (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) issued show cause notice to the Company and two erstwhile Directors i.e. Mr.R.A. Sheth and Mr.C.A.Metha for violation of Section 18(2) and 18(3) read with section 38(1) & (2) of the FERA Act 1973. This violation is for non-realization of the export proceeds of Rs. 1.11 crores in respect of export of Diamonds and Rs.64.51 lakhs for export of Methyl Esters during Feb. 1989 to Feb. 1990 when erstwhile Directors Mr. R.A. Sheth and Mr. C.A.Metha were in charge of the affairs of the Company.

The Enforcement Directorate has imposed penalties of Rs. 40 Lakhs each on the said two responsible ex-Directors as they have been a found personally responsible for the violation of FERA.

In the opinion of the Director of Enforcement the Company, being a juridical person, is also to be charged although only the above named two ex-directors were personally involved in the violation and there is every possibility that moneys were directly realized by both of them.

The penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed on the Company is contested and matter is pending. No provision is made in accounts as in the opinion of the Directors, the Company is not required to pay penalty.

5. The Company has been discharged from the purview of SICK INDUSTRIES COMPANY''S ACT by Hon''ble BIFR vide an order dated 12th May 2011.

In the Opinion of the Management, the company was a going concern as on 31st March, 2010 and books of account have been prepared on that basis accordingly.

6. In the opinion of the Board of Directors, the current assets, loans and advances are stated at value realisable in the ordinery course of business except otherwise stated. The provisions of all known and determined liabilities are adequte and not in excess of the amount reasonably necessary.

7. Debtors, Creditors and loans & Advances, deposits & other accounts are subject to confirmations. Debit and Credit balances under the above heads are shown as per books of accounts and are subject to confirmation and reconciliation. Consequential adjustment there of, if any, will be given effect into the books of accounts in the year of such adjustment.

8. The Company has licensed out its soap plant to M/s Nova Oleochem Ltd., an associate Concern.

9. The Company has not received any intimation regarding the status under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise Development Act, 2006 and hence the discloure requirement in this regards as per Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956, could not be given.

10. The Company was mainly engaged in the business of processing, and trading in Vegetable oil Allied Products in the year. Therefore all the operation of the company are considered as single segment for the purpose of As 17 on "segment Reporting" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

11. Earning Per Share:

In accordance with Accounting Standard 20- Earning per Share prescribed by The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the computation of earning per share is set out below:

The Company does not have any dilutive potential equity shares. Consequently the basic and diluted earning per share of the Company remain the same.

12. CURRENT TAX:

The taxable income of the company being lower than the book profit as per the Income Tax Act, 1961, the company has provided for Minimum Alternate Tax(MAT) on its income.

DEFERRED TAX :

As the company has substantial unabsorbed depreciation and carried forward Business losses under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and is unlikely to have taxable income in the foreseeable future, the net deferred tax assets including related credit for the year have not been recognized in these accounts on the prudent basis. This is in accordance with Accounting Standard 22 "Accounting for Taxes on Income" issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.

13. In pursuance of AS 28 on impairment of assets issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, the company has undertaken summary overview of the assets held by it and is of the view that no asset requires provision for impairment.

The management is of the view that net recoverable value of the plants are more than the carrying value of the plants and hence there is no impairment of asset which needs to be provided in books of accounts.

14. Previous period figures are regrouped and rearranged wherever necessary.

 
Subscribe now to get personal finance updates in your inbox!