MIRA
INFORM REPORT
|
Report Date : |
07.05.2008 |
IDENTIFICATION
DETAILS
|
Name : |
ECLERX SERVICES LIMITED |
|
|
|
|
Registered Office : |
Sonawalla Building, 1st Floor, 29 Bank Street, Fort, Mumbai
– 400023, Maharashtra |
|
|
|
|
Country : |
India |
|
|
|
|
Financials (as on) : |
31.03.2007 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Incorporation : |
24.03.2000 |
|
|
|
|
Com. Reg. No.: |
125319 |
|
|
|
|
CIN No.: [Company
Identification No.] |
U72200MH2000PLC125319 |
|
|
|
|
TAN No.: [Tax
Deduction & Collection Account No.] |
MUME03752A |
|
|
|
|
PAN No.: [Permanent
Account No.] |
AAACE7932L |
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
A Closely Held Public Limited Liability Company |
|
|
|
|
Line of Business : |
Designing Data Solutions |
RATING &
COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
A |
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General
unfavourable factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for
payment of interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
Maximum Credit Limit : |
USD 1174012 |
|
|
|
|
Status : |
Good |
|
|
|
|
Payment Behaviour : |
Regular |
|
|
|
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
|
|
|
|
Comments : |
Subject is a well established and reputed company having fine track.
Trade relations are fair. General financial position is satisfactory.
Payments are reported as usually correct and as per commitments. The company can be considered good for normal business dealings at
usual trade terms and conditions. |
LOCATIONS
|
Registered Office : |
Sonawalla Building, 1st Floor, 29 Bank Street, Fort, Mumbai
– 400023, Maharashtra, India |
|
Tel. No.: |
91-22-40914100 |
|
Fax No.: |
91-22-40941212 |
|
E-Mail : |
|
|
Website : |
DIRECTORS
|
Name : |
Mr. P D Mundhra |
|
Designation : |
Executive Director |
|
Date of Birth : |
34 years |
|
Qualifications : |
MBA |
|
Experiences : |
10 years |
|
Date of Appointment : |
01.04.2006 |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. V K Mundhra |
|
Designation : |
Director |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Anjan Malik |
|
Designation : |
Non Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Pradeep Kapoor |
|
Designation : |
Non Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Anish Ghosal |
|
Designation : |
Non Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Vikram Limaye |
|
Designation : |
Non Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Jimmy Bilimoria |
|
Designation : |
Director |
KEY EXECUTIVES
|
Name : |
Mrs. Shweta Bansal |
|
Designation : |
Company Secretary |
BUSINESS DETAILS
|
Line of Business : |
Designing Data Solutions |
GENERAL
INFORMATION
|
Bankers : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Banking
Relations : |
- |
|
|
|
|
Auditors : |
|
|
Name : |
C M Gabhawala and Company Chartered Accountant |
|
Address : |
42 Nanik Niwas, 30 Dr. D D Sathe Marg, Girgaum, Mumbai – 400004,
Maharashtra, India |
|
Tel No.: |
91-22-23823923/ 23824641/ 23841752 |
|
Fax No.: |
91-22-23850931 |
|
Email : |
|
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Walker Chandiok and Company Chartered Accountant |
CAPITAL STRUCTURE
Authorised Capital :
|
No. of Shares |
Type |
Value |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1100000 |
Equity Shares |
Rs.10/- each |
Rs.11.000 Millions |
|
|
|
|
|
Issued, Subscribed & Paid-up Capital :
|
No. of Shares |
Type |
Value |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1012500 |
Equity Shares |
Rs.10/- each |
Rs.10.125
Millions |
|
|
|
|
|
(Of the above shares 1000000 Equity Shares of
Rs.10/- each have been issued for consideration other than cash buy way of
Bonus Shares by shares by capitalizing free reserves)
FINANCIAL DATA
[all figures are in Rupees Millions]
ABRIDGED BALANCE
SHEET
|
SOURCES OF FUNDS |
31.03.2007 |
31.03.2006 |
31.03.2005 |
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS FUNDS |
|
|
|
|
|
1] Share Capital |
10.125 |
10.125 |
0.100 |
|
|
2] Stock Option Outstanding |
0.187 |
0.050 |
0.000 |
|
|
3] Reserves & Surplus |
283.191 |
117.407 |
64.200 |
|
|
4] (Accumulated Losses) |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
NETWORTH |
293.503 |
127.582 |
64.300 |
|
|
LOAN FUNDS |
|
|
|
|
|
1] Secured Loans |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
2] Unsecured Loans |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
TOTAL BORROWING |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
DEFERRED TAX LIABILITIES |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
293.503 |
127.582 |
64.300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPLICATION OF FUNDS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FIXED ASSETS [Net Block] |
76.535 |
30.949 |
31.200 |
|
|
Capital work-in-progress |
0.400 |
0.000 |
1.500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTMENT |
0.022 |
12.624 |
0.000 |
|
|
DEFERREX TAX ASSETS |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS, LOANS & ADVANCES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories |
65.782
|
30.712 |
0.000 |
|
|
Sundry Debtors |
73.511
|
59.037 |
42.100 |
|
|
Cash & Bank Balances |
119.235
|
66.367 |
18.500 |
|
|
Other Current Assets |
0.000
|
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Loans & Advances |
19.973
|
12.908 |
4.200 |
|
Total
Current Assets |
278.501
|
169.024 |
64.800 |
|
|
Less : CURRENT
LIABILITIES & PROVISIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities |
23.089
|
4.457 |
16.800 |
|
|
Provisions |
38.866
|
130.558 |
16.400 |
|
Total
Current Liabilities |
61.955
|
135.015 |
33.200 |
|
|
Net Current Assets |
216.546
|
34.009 |
31.600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
293.503 |
127.582 |
64.300 |
|
PROFIT & LOSS
ACCOUNT
|
PARTICULARS |
31.03.2007 |
31.03.2006 |
31.03.2005 |
|
|
Sales Turnover |
861.197 |
471.981 |
265.300 |
|
|
Other Income |
1.142 |
4.882 |
1.100 |
|
|
Total Income |
862.339 |
476.863 |
266.400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profit/(Loss) Before Tax |
431.573 |
261.691 |
111.800 |
|
|
Provision for Taxation |
32.147 |
15.143 |
(0.500) |
|
|
Profit/(Loss) After Tax |
399.426 |
246.548 |
112.300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Export Value |
795.415 |
441.269 |
NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Import Value |
16.018 |
9.394 |
NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenditures : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Administrative Expenses |
165.887 |
81.358 |
75.700 |
|
|
Raw Material Consumed |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Purchases made for re-sale |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Consumption of stores and spares parts |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Increase/(Decrease) in Finished Goods |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Salaries, Wages, Bonus, etc. |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Managerial Remuneration |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Payment to Auditors |
245.467 |
125.059 |
66.700 |
|
|
Interest |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Insurance Expenses |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Power & Fuel |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
|
Depreciation & Amortization |
19.412 |
8.755 |
12.200 |
|
|
Other Expenditure |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
|
Total Expenditure |
430.766 |
215.172 |
154.600 |
|
QUARTERLY /
SUMMARISED RESULTS
|
PARTICULARS |
|
|
31.12.2007 3rd
Quarter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales Turnover |
|
|
312.400 |
|
Other Income |
|
|
15.300 |
|
Total Income |
|
|
327.700 |
|
Total Expenditure |
|
|
181.400 |
|
Operating Profit |
|
|
146.300 |
|
Interests |
|
|
1.200 |
|
Gross Profit |
|
|
145.100 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
12.800 |
|
Tax |
|
|
15.100 |
|
Reported PAT |
|
|
117.200 |
KEY RATIOS
|
PARTICULARS |
|
31.03.2007 |
31.03.2006 |
31.03.2005 |
|
Debt-Equity Ratio |
(%) |
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
Long Term
Debt-Equity Ratio |
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
Current Ratio |
(%) |
2.25
|
1.38 |
0.87 |
|
TURNOVER RATIOS |
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Assets |
(%) |
6.67
|
5.61 |
6.08 |
|
Inventory |
|
0.00
|
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Debtors |
|
9.28
|
8.70 |
12.60 |
|
Interest Cover
Ratio |
|
0.00
|
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Operating Profit
Margin (%) |
|
50.36
|
55.34 |
46.74 |
|
Profit Before
Interest And Tax Margin (%) |
|
47.36
|
51.33 |
42.14 |
|
Cash Profit
Margin(%) |
|
50.05
|
54.94 |
46.93 |
|
Adjusted Net
Profit Margin (%) |
|
47.05
|
50.93 |
42.33 |
|
Return On Capital
Employed (%) |
|
197.39
|
262.94 |
321.26 |
|
Return On Net
Worth (%) |
|
196.08
|
260.88 |
322.70 |
LOCAL AGENCY
FURTHER INFORMATION
Fixed Assets:
· Leasehold Improvement
· Computer
· Furniture and
· Fixture
· Office Equipment
Press Releases:
Judging
Performance | Appraisal methods take centre stage
With revenues and profitability so dependent on the quality
of human resources, it has become important to measure this in a scientific and
unambiguous way. Companies are now beginning to look at performance management
strategically and are modifying systems to suit business needs
By
Rajeshwari Sharma
As human resources become increasingly critical to the growth
of businesses, measuring human capital, identifying, developing, rewarding and
managing employee performance is being looked at more strategically than ever
before. With investors and other stakeholders evaluating company performance on
a quarterly basis, appraisal systems are being tweaked regularly to suit
changing business needs.
Beverages firm Coca-Cola India, for instance,
recently replaced its five-point rating system with a four-point grading
methodology to force reviewing managers to take that tough call on rating
appraisees, and not take a median approach. “We found out, in many cases, that
the appraiser would take the easy way out and assign a score of 2.5 or 2.7,
rather than making the difficult choice of giving 2 or 3,” says Nalin Garg, vice-president,
human resources, Coca-Cola India.
Five months ago, business process outsourcing company vCustomer
Corp. went online with its performance management system. The company broke
down quarterly reviews into monthly objectives, and put in place informal
feedback sessions every month to avoid any surprises, both for the employee and
the employer, at the end of the quarter.
At Jindal Stainless Ltd, raises and promotions of
managers will now depend more on tangible deliverables. All managerial staff at
the steel firm is evaluated on the basis of current performance—measured by
supervisors (40% weightage), and an outside agency, which assesses the
leadership potential of the appraisee, weighted at 40%, while 20% weightage is
given to the assessment made by cross-functional teams (for all-round
feedback). “Along with a sharpened focus on deliverables, this year, we plan to
increase the variable component from 15% of the gross salary to 20%,” says S.K.
Jain, senior vice-president, human resources, Jindal Stainless.
Like Jindal Stainless, electrical distribution company Schneider
Electric India Pvt. Ltd has made it mandatory for reviewing managers to
evaluate appraisees according to the specific levels and bands they fall under,
and not in clustered groups. For example, regional managers in sales teams will
be compared with each other or employees in similar job roles. “The idea is to
compare apples with apples,” says Robin Singh, director, human resources,
Schneider Electric.
From this year, data analytics and customized process
solutions provider eClerx Services Ltd has linked part of the bonus
given to managers to competency-based development. For instance, a manager who
is found lacking in soft skills is sent for training to fill that gap. “We made
this change to make sure managers take training and development to fill
competency gaps seriously,” says Kishore Poduri, head of human resources at
eClerx.
Through these changes, eClerx and others are aiming at a
performance-driven culture—among the first few to do so.
For, says Ganesh Shermon, head of human capital advisory
service at consultant KPMG India : “Most companies in India still have
basic, ad hoc models that have neither clear objectives set out nor the
recognition of the criticality of a performance management system.”
Increasingly, however, companies are moving from a
traditional performance management approach to the balanced scorecard—a
framework developed by Robert Kaplan and David Norton in the 1990s, which
aligns business activities to the vision and strategy of the organization, and
monitors the performance of the organization against strategic goals.
Interestingly, there is an increasing amount of scrutiny on
quality of work, with companies placing significant importance on qualitative measures.
“It is no longer only about numbers and meeting targets. The means to the end
(goals) has become very important,” says Shermon. “Companies want to know how
employees are meeting their key performance areas. Is there a strategy and
ethics involved in it?” says Shermon. “It is often seen that an employee may
have met targets but also diluted a bit of the organization’s brand.”
“Appraisal is also about competencies or manifestation of
the corporate behaviour an employee deploys while achieving goals and targets,
in conformity with approved behaviour,” adds Shermon.
Some companies that have adopted balanced scorecards or
other performance management methodologies—such as KPMG’s value-based
management, Arthur Andersen’s value dynamics, Stern Stewart EVA—include
Coca-Cola India,PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd, Godrej and Boyce
Manufacturing Co. Ltd, Syngenta India Ltd, Cargill India Pvt. Ltd,
eClerx, HCL Technologies Ltd, Satyam Computer Services Ltd, Toyota
Kirloskar Motors Ltd, Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd, and public
sector firms such as Indian Oil Corp. Ltd and Bharat Petroleum Corp.
Ltd.
Explaining the rationale of changing appraisal systems,
Sanjay Bali, vice-president of human resources, Samsung India, says: “Measuring
the quality of human resources on changing performance parameters in a
scientific and unambiguous way is critical since revenues and profitability are
so dependent on it.”
Thus, companies are adding and/or modifying more variants,
metrics and key result areas to the performance measurement system to bring in
objectivity and align individual goals with those of the organization. For
example, a sales executive is now evaluated on parameters such as leadership
skills and initiative, teamwork and cooperation, people skills and contribution
to the overall corporate brand, in addition to key result areas such as sales
generated, customer retention and acquisition. The definition of key
performance areas is better articulated now and these have become more
measurable than before.
For instance, all employees at PepsiCo get rated on business
and people results, with 50% weightage on each parameter. People results
comprise four key areas—values-based culture, inclusion and diversity, talent
management and personal development. PepsiCo India executive director of human
resources, Pavan Bhatia, reasons, “The kind of business we are in, it is
important that all employees, starting from the frontline staff to the business
head, focus on people results.” He adds, “Along with business results, building
the capability of the next line of employees is very important.”
The appraisal system, which was put in place in 2006 by
PepsiCo India, is now being adopted across the beverages company’s offices
worldwide.
As organizations move from the concept of individual
business units to entrepreneurial business units, where entrepreneurial
capabilities are applied within an organization, people management and
leadership skills are becoming key performance areas, even for junior
employees. Companies are driving the leadership objective right from the lowest
level in an organization.
K.K. Swamy, deputy managing director at Toyota Kirloskar
Motors, says: “Employees across levels are measured on leadership competencies,
only the weightage on leadership skills increases from junior to senior
levels.”
Human resource consultants say the orientation to
performance management has changed over the last several years—appraisal
systems now play a far greater role in an organization’s overall strategy.
“Companies want to get it right not just in terms of measuring current
performance, but also measuring an employee’s potential,” says Anita Belani,
country head, Watson Wyatt India Pvt. Ltd, a global human resource
consulting firm.
Human resource managers say that while it is important to
have measures in place, an unbiased, transparent measure mechanism is
necessary. While PepsiCo India’s Bhatia has put in place a survey called
Connect that tracks whether people results are being fulfilled, Schneider
Electric’s Singh has made it known that an appraisal report will not be
considered complete till the appraisee and the reviewing manager’s manager, who
is often the chief executive, send their comments on the appraisal.
Singh says objectivity is not easily achieved since,
culturally, employees in India are not geared to deal with performance rating
professionally.
But, it is essential. “Performance management is the big
picture of a company’s vision, and (of) how the contribution of individuals,
teams, divisions and, ultimately, the organization as a whole can help realize
it,” says Navyug Mohnot, chief executive officer of QAI India Ltd, a
consulting firm that deploys process improvement and quality initiatives in
organizations.
CMT REPORT
(Corruption, Money Laundering & Terrorism]
The Public Notice information has been collected from various sources
including but not limited to: The Courts, India Prisons Service,
Interpol, etc.
1] INFORMATION ON
DESIGNATED PARTY
No records exist designating subject or any of its beneficial owners,
controlling shareholders or senior officers as terrorist or terrorist
organization or whom notice had been received that all financial transactions
involving their assets have been blocked or convicted, found guilty or against
whom a judgement or order had been entered in a proceedings for violating
money-laundering, anti-corruption or bribery or international economic or
anti-terrorism sanction laws or whose assets were seized, blocked, frozen or
ordered forfeited for violation of money laundering or international
anti-terrorism laws.
2] Court Declaration :
No records exist to suggest that subject is
or was the subject of any formal or informal allegations, prosecutions or other
official proceeding for making any prohibited payments or other improper
payments to government officials for engaging in prohibited transactions or
with designated parties.
3] Asset Declaration :
No records exist to suggest that the property or assets of the subject
are derived from criminal conduct or a prohibited transaction.
4] Record on Financial
Crime :
Charges or conviction
registered against subject: None
5] Records on Violation of
Anti-Corruption Laws :
Charges or
investigation registered against subject: None
6] Records on Int’l
Anti-Money Laundering Laws/Standards :
Charges or
investigation registered against subject: None
7] Criminal Records
No
available information exist that suggest that subject or any of its principals
have been formally charged or convicted by a competent governmental authority
for any financial crime or under any formal investigation by a competent
government authority for any violation of anti-corruption laws or international
anti-money laundering laws or standard.
8] Affiliation with
Government :
No record
exists to suggest that any director or indirect owners, controlling
shareholders, director, officer or employee of the company is a government
official or a family member or close business associate of a Government
official.
9] Compensation Package :
Our market
survey revealed that the amount of compensation sought by the subject is fair
and reasonable and comparable to compensation paid to others for similar
services.
10] Press Report :
No press reports / filings exists on
the subject.
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
MIRA INFORM as part of its Due Diligence do provide comments on
Corporate Governance to identify management and governance. These factors often
have been predictive and in some cases have created vulnerabilities to credit
deterioration.
Our Governance Assessment focuses principally on the interactions
between a company’s management, its Board of Directors, Shareholders and other
financial stakeholders.
CONTRAVENTION
Subject is not known to have contravened any existing local laws,
regulations or policies that prohibit, restrict or otherwise affect the terms
and conditions that could be included in the agreement with the subject.
FOREIGN EXCHANGE
RATES
|
Currency |
Unit
|
Indian Rupees |
|
US Dollar |
1 |
Rs.40.69 |
|
UK Pound |
1 |
Rs.80.25 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.63.08 |
SCORE & RATING
EXPLANATIONS
|
SCORE FACTORS |
RANGE |
POINTS |
|
HISTORY |
1~10 |
5 |
|
PAID-UP CAPITAL |
1~10 |
6 |
|
OPERATING SCALE |
1~10 |
6 |
|
FINANCIAL CONDITION |
|
|
|
--BUSINESS SCALE |
1~10 |
8 |
|
--PROFITABILIRY |
1~10 |
5 |
|
--LIQUIDITY |
1~10 |
9 |
|
--LEVERAGE |
1~10 |
9 |
|
--RESERVES |
1~10 |
9 |
|
--CREDIT LINES |
1~10 |
9 |
|
--MARGINS |
-5~5 |
- |
|
DEMERIT POINTS |
|
|
|
--BANK CHARGES |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
--LITIGATION |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--OTHER ADVERSE INFORMATION |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
MERIT POINTS |
|
|
|
--SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--EXPORT ACTIVITIES |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
--AFFILIATION |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
--LISTED |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
--OTHER MERIT FACTORS |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
TOTAL |
|
66 |
This score serves as a reference to assess SC’s credit risk
and to set the amount of credit to be extended. It is calculated from a composite
of weighted scores obtained from each of the major sections of this report. The
assessed factors and their relative weights (as indicated through %) are as
follows:
Financial
condition (40%) Ownership
background (20%) Payment
record (10%)
Credit history
(10%) Market trend
(10%) Operational
size (10%)
RATING
EXPLANATIONS
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
>86 |
Aaa |
Possesses an extremely sound financial base with the strongest capability
for timely payment of interest and principal sums |
Unlimited |
|
71-85 |
Aa |
Possesses adequate working capital. No caution needed for credit
transaction. It has above average (strong) capability for payment of interest
and principal sums |
Large |
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General
unfavourable factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for
payment of interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
26-40 |
B |
Unfavourable & favourable factors carry similar weight in credit
consideration. Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems
comparatively below average. |
Small |
|
11-25 |
Ca |
Adverse factors are apparent. Repayment of interest and principal sums
in default or expected to be in default upon maturity |
Limited with
full security |
|
<10 |
C |
Absolute credit risk exists. Caution needed to be exercised |
Credit not
recommended |
|
NR |
In view of the lack of information, we have no basis upon which to
recommend credit dealings |
No Rating |
|