MIRA INFORM REPORT
|
Report No. : |
321519 |
|
Report Date : |
08.05.2015 |
IDENTIFICATION DETAILS
|
Name : |
UBER INDIA SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED |
|
|
|
|
Registered
Office : |
Regus Business Platinum Centre Private Limited, Level 13, Platinum Techno
Park, Plot No.17/18, Sec-30A, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705, Maharashtra |
|
Tel. No.: |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Country : |
India |
|
|
|
|
Financials (as
on) : |
31.03.2014 |
|
|
|
|
Date of
Incorporation : |
16.08.2013 |
|
|
|
|
Com. Reg. No.: |
11-247008 |
|
|
|
|
Capital
Investment / Paid-up Capital : |
Rs. 0.500 Million |
|
|
|
|
CIN No.: [Company Identification
No.] |
U74120MH2013FTC247008 |
|
|
|
|
IEC No.: |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
TAN No.: [Tax Deduction &
Collection Account No.] |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
PAN No.: [Permanent Account No.] |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
Private Limited Liability Company |
|
|
|
|
Line of Business
: |
Providing marketing and support services to UBER for promotions of
UBER’s market presence. |
|
|
|
|
No. of Employees
: |
Not Available |
RATING & COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
A (60) |
|
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 |
|
Status : |
Good |
|
|
|
|
Payment Behaviour : |
Regular |
|
|
|
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
|
|
|
|
Comments : |
Subject is subsidiary of “UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC” USA. It is having a fine track record. The rating takes into consideration company’s global business footprint backed by its wide spared service networks in 57 countries and more than 300 cities in the world. Rating also takes into account of strong venture partners and experienced management team. Uber has a valuation of USD 41 Billion. It is backed by funding support from Google Ventures and serval other venture capitalist of reputes.
With respect to the Indian operations, it is to be noted the operations have been affected in the past due to government and RBI interference. (viz. Recent events in Delhi as well as payment getaway issue)
As per the financial record of 2014, the company has reported decent sales turnover and it has achieved profit from its operational activities. Trade relations are reported to be fair. Payments are reported to be regular and as per commitment. In view of
aforesaid, the company can be considered good for normal business dealings at
usual trade terms and conditions. |
NOTES :
Any query related to this report can be made
on e-mail : infodept@mirainform.com
while quoting report number, name and date.
EXTERNAL AGENCY RATING
Not Available
RBI DEFAULTERS’ LIST STATUS
Subject’s name is not enlisted as a defaulter
in the publicly available RBI Defaulters’ list.
EPF (Employee Provident Fund) DEFAULTERS’ LIST STATUS
Subject’s name is not enlisted as a defaulter
in the publicly available EPF (Employee Provident Fund) Defaulters’ list as of
31-03-2014.
INFORMATION DECLINED
Unable to Contact
LOCATIONS
|
Registered Office : |
Regus Business Platinum Centre Private Limited, Level 13, Platinum
Techno Park, Plot No.17/18, Sec-30A, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400705, Maharashtra,
India |
|
Tel. No.: |
Not Available |
|
Fax No.: |
Not Available |
|
E-Mail : |
DIRECTORS
As on 30.12.2014
|
Name : |
Axel Martinez |
|
Designation : |
Director |
|
Address : |
1980 Carmelita Ave, Burlingame, CA 94010-4909, Burlingame, 94010, United States of America |
|
Date of Appointment : |
19.11.2014 |
|
DIN No.: |
07011667 |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Karen Sammis Walker |
|
Designation : |
Director |
|
Address : |
112, 28th ST, San Francisco, CA 94131-2405, San Francisco, 94131 , United States of America |
|
Date of Appointment : |
19.11.2014 |
|
DIN No.: |
07011678 |
|
|
|
|
Name : |
Mr. Rohit Lohia |
|
Designation : |
Director |
|
Address : |
D-130, Sector 10, Noida-201301, Uttar Pradesh, India |
|
Date of Appointment : |
05.12.2014 |
|
DIN No.: |
02924425 |
MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS / SHAREHOLDING PATTERN
As on 30.12.2014
|
Names of Shareholders |
No. of Shares |
Percentage |
|
Uber International holding B.V., Netherlands |
45000 |
90.00 |
|
Uber International B.V., Netherlands |
5000 |
10.00 |
|
Total |
50000 |
100.00 |
Equity Share Break up (Percentage of Total Equity)
|
Category |
Percentage |
|
Foreign holdings( Foreign institutional investor(s),
Foreign companie(s) Foreign financial institution(s), Non-resident Indian(s)
or Overseas Corporate bodies or Others |
100.00 |
|
Total |
100.00 |
BUSINESS DETAILS
|
Line of Business : |
Providing marketing and support services to UBER for promotions of
UBER’s market presence. |
|
|
|
|
Products : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Brand Names : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Agencies Held : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Exports : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Imports : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Terms : |
|
|
Selling : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Purchasing : |
Not Available |
PRODUCTION STATUS NOT AVAILABLE
GENERAL INFORMATION
|
Suppliers : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Customers : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
No. of Employees : |
Not Available |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bankers : |
|
|
Auditors : |
|
|
Name : |
K. V. Ganesan and Company Chartered Accountants |
|
Address : |
11, (old no. 47), Coconut Avenue Road, Malleswaram, Banglore-560003,
Karnataka, India |
|
PAN No.: |
ABGPG5905K |
|
|
|
|
Memberships : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Collaborators : |
Not Available |
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Holding Companies : |
Uber Technologies Inc, USA |
|
|
|
|
Holding Company : |
Uber International Holding BV, The Netherland |
|
|
|
|
Fellow Subsidiary : |
Uber BV, Amsterdam, The Netherland |
CAPITAL STRUCTURE
As on 30.12.2014
Authorised Capital :
|
No. of Shares |
Type |
Value |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
Equity Shares |
Rs.10/- each |
Rs.0.500 Million |
|
|
|
|
|
Issued, Subscribed & Paid-up Capital :
|
No. of Shares |
Type |
Value |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
Equity Shares |
Rs.10/- each |
Rs.0.500 Million |
|
|
|
|
|
FINANCIAL DATA
[all figures are
in Rupees Million]
ABRIDGED BALANCE
SHEET
|
SOURCES OF FUNDS |
|
|
31.03.2014 |
|
I.
EQUITY
AND LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
(1)Shareholders' Funds |
|
|
|
|
(a) Share Capital |
|
|
0.500 |
|
(b) Reserves & Surplus |
|
|
0.700 |
|
(c) Money
received against share warrants |
|
|
0.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) Share Application money pending allotment |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Total
Shareholders’ Funds (1) + (2) |
|
|
1.200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
Non-Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
(a) long-term borrowings |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(b) Deferred tax liabilities (Net) |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(c) Other long term
liabilities |
|
|
22.671 |
|
(d) long-term
provisions |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Total Non-current
Liabilities (3) |
|
|
22.671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4)
Current Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
(a) Short
term borrowings |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(b) Trade
payables |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(c) Other
current liabilities |
|
|
1.835 |
|
(d) Short-term
provisions |
|
|
1.422 |
|
Total Current
Liabilities (4) |
|
|
3.257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
27.128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
II.
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
(1)
Non-current assets |
|
|
|
|
(a) Fixed Assets |
|
|
|
|
(i)
Tangible assets |
|
|
0.126 |
|
(ii)
Intangible Assets |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(iii)
Capital work-in-progress |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(iv)
Intangible assets under development |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(b) Non-current Investments |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(c) Deferred tax assets (net) |
|
|
0.132 |
|
(d) Long-term Loan and Advances |
|
|
0.730 |
|
(e) Other
Non-current assets |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Total Non-Current
Assets |
|
|
0.988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
Current assets |
|
|
|
|
(a)
Current investments |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(b)
Inventories |
|
|
0.000 |
|
(c) Trade
receivables |
|
|
22.570 |
|
(d) Cash
and cash equivalents |
|
|
0.500 |
|
(e)
Short-term loans and advances |
|
|
3.070 |
|
(f) Other
current assets |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Total
Current Assets |
|
|
26.140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
27.128 |
PROFIT & LOSS
ACCOUNT
|
|
PARTICULARS |
|
|
31.03.2014 |
|
|
|
SALES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
22.570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less |
EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
20.802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROFIT BEFORE
TAX |
|
|
1.768 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less |
TAX |
|
|
1.068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROFIT AFTER TAX
|
|
|
0.700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Share
(Rs.) |
|
|
14.00 |
|
KEY RATIOS
|
PARTICULARS |
|
|
|
31.03.2014 |
|
Net Profit Margin (PAT / Total Income) |
(%) |
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on Total Assets (PBT/Total Assets} |
(%) |
|
|
6.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on Investment (ROI) (PBT/Networth) |
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Equity Ratio (Total Debt /Networth) |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Ratio (Current Asset/Current Liability) |
|
|
|
8.03 |
LOCAL AGENCY FURTHER INFORMATION
CURRENT
MATURITIES OF LONG-TERM DEBT DETAILS: NOT AVAILABLE
|
Sr. No. |
Check List by Info
Agents |
Available in Report (Yes / No) |
|
1] |
Year of Establishment |
Yes |
|
2] |
Locality of the firm |
Yes |
|
3] |
Constitutions of the firm |
Yes |
|
4] |
Premises details |
No |
|
5] |
Type of Business |
Yes |
|
6] |
Line of Business |
Yes |
|
7] |
Promoter's background |
Yes |
|
8] |
No. of employees |
No |
|
9] |
Name of person contacted |
No |
|
10] |
Designation of contact person |
No |
|
11] |
Turnover of firm for last one year |
Yes |
|
12] |
Profitability for last one year |
Yes |
|
13] |
Reasons for variation <> 20% |
---------------------- |
|
14] |
Estimation for coming financial year |
No |
|
15] |
Capital in the business |
Yes |
|
16] |
Details of sister concerns |
No |
|
17] |
Major suppliers |
No |
|
18] |
Major customers |
No |
|
19] |
Payments terms |
No |
|
20] |
Export / Import details (if applicable) |
No |
|
21] |
Market information |
---------------------- |
|
22] |
Litigations that the firm / promoter involved in |
---------------------- |
|
23] |
Banking Details |
No |
|
24] |
Banking facility details |
No |
|
25] |
Conduct of the banking account |
---------------------- |
|
26] |
Buyer visit details |
---------------------- |
|
27] |
Financials, if provided |
Yes |
|
28] |
Incorporation details, if applicable |
Yes |
|
29] |
Last accounts filed at ROC |
Yes |
|
30] |
Major Shareholders, if available |
Yes |
|
31] |
Date of Birth of Proprietor/Partner/Director, if available |
No |
|
32] |
PAN of Proprietor/Partner/Director, if available |
No |
|
33] |
Voter ID No of Proprietor/Partner/Director, if available |
No |
|
34] |
External Agency Rating, if available |
No |
INDEX OF CHARGES: NO
CHARGES EXIST FOR THE COMPANY
FIXED ASSETS
- Computers
- Office
equipment
NEWS:
UBER SNAGS $41 BILLION VALUATION
Date: December 5,
2014
Ride-sharing service Uber Technologies says a new round of funding values it at $41 billion, a bet by some of the world’s top investors the firm can sustain a breakneck global expansion pace despite fierce challenges from regulators and taxi companies.
GOOGLE VENTURES PUTS $258M INTO UBER, ITS LARGEST DEAL EVER
Date :22.08.2013
A certificate unearthed by All Things D today shows that Uber has closed $361.2 million in its latest round. It’s unknown why TPG, which picked up 775,092 shares, paid a lower per-share price than the other participants. The late-stage investor plunked down a total of $88.4 million in Uber. Existing investor Benchmark put in another $15 million in this round.
The total Uber raise can be calculated by combining the shared value of Uber’s new Series C-1 and Series C-2 stock. The 1,913,782 C-1 shares are worth $142.54 each, and the 775,092 C-2 shares are worth $114.032 each. Multiply the per-share value of each C class by the number of shares, and you come to a total value of $361.2 million. C-2 investor TPG got an Uber board seat, according to the term sheet.
What is most interesting about this raise, however, isn’t evident in this filing. According to the document, the black-car on-demand service has raised $103.4 million from TPG, Benchmark and someone who picked up another 1.8 million shares. We and Kara Swisher have both confirmed that Google Ventures is the largest investor in the round, pumping $257.79 million into the car service. The round values Uber at around $3.4 billion pre-money and $3.76 billion post.
The investment was led by Google Ventures General Partner David Krane. Despite it being a later-stage investment, it was not a Google Capital deal, mainly because of the heavy Google Ventures involvement in sourcing and negotiating, we hear. The $258 million is an 86 percent chunk of Google Ventures’ $300 million dollar a year fund, and it’s unclear whether the firm will continue to make such sizable investments.
As both Google Ventures and Google Capital come out of Google’s balance sheet, this is purely a matter of semantics, and logo. We’ve also confirmed, like Swisher reported, that a meeting with Google CEO Larry Page sealed the deal — wherein Page outlined how Google’s resources could bolster Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick‘s grand plan to offer everything via iPhone.
On-demand car services have been stockpiling moola this year. Lyft, a company that competes with Uber, recently raised a $60 million C round from Andreessen Horowitz and others. Hailo raised a total of $50 million from Richard Branson even. Uber itself has expanded outside of its original black-car service to both taxi and ride-sharing options, growing its footprint by becoming more accessible to users from all walks of life. Interestingly enough, Google Ventures is an early-stage investor in Uber competitor Side Car, but because Uber is focusing on being everybody’s private space elevator and self-driving cab*, we guess this isn’t a conflict.
As many have pointed out, this raise is massive — Google Ventures’ largest deal ever — giving Uber much latitude to grow and prepare itself for an IPO. Given the scale of the cash injection, the company might not have to raise another series round before going public, though a bridge round isn’t inconceivable.
In the race to get you around cities with only a smartphone and a saved credit-card number, the major players now have all the fuel they need — with one having the most.
UBER INDIA RANTS AGAINST THE RBI COMPLIANCE, BUT IS IT
OVERLOOKING ITS OWN MISTAKES?
Date 02.12.2014
Uber has blamed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for a slow conversion of customers from credit cards to a wallet system, which was incorporated after the RBI made the two-step authentication process mandatory for all transactions taking place in India.
While the rule tries to make online transactions more secure, it conflicts with websites that use a payment gateway which is located overseas, which may not implement the same authentication process. The RBI mandate also prohibits what it calls ‘foreign exchange outflow’ and insists that transactions within India must be done through a bank within the country and in Indian rupees. Uber, being a US-based company, has therefore had to revise its payment process, which now involves users to pay via a third-party wallet, called Paytm.
Unlike the previous model, which needed travelers to enter their credit card details just once and when charges would automatically get deducted at the end of their rides, the new system needs users to recharge their Paytm wallets before the journey. Paytm’s payment gateway includes the two-factor authentication (2FA), which complies with RBI’s guidelines.
While this requirement is intended to provide more security for consumers, Uber claims that “it is an antiquated solution that is cumbersome for consumers and stifling for businesses across India.” It has also blamed the RBI for not being able to generate much revenue after the change.
The company goes on to slam the 2FA requirement, saying “Ahead of the Reserve Bank of India’s (“RBI”) compliance deadline we have seen a slow conversion of riders from credit cards to a 2FA compliant wallet, which indicates their trust in Uber’s payment system and a preference for more convenient yet secure online/mobile payments. Despite consumer preference and in the face of rapidly changing business expectations, India’s one-of-a-kind 2FA requirement persists, causing a major challenge for businesses trying to offer Indian consumers a better purchasing experience.”
However, Uber customers have a different story to tell. Uber India’s Facebook page has users voicing against Uber and Paytm’s poor customer service, which has ultimately made the new payment process a pain in the neck.
While Uber blames the RBI’s mandate, some Uber customers have found that the system isn’t implemented properly. One customer says “I have added prepaid wallet 3-4days back, I have not been able to book a ride. My balance does not show up in the Uber account. And no one to respond to mails and no call centre also..” Another person says “Paytm wallet is not working in my Android Tab. I couldnt link it with my card today morning when I needed your service the most !”
Another user said, “”Adoption” has not been “slow” by consumers. It has been next to impossible. I have been trying to link the payment wallet to Uber for two days running but keep facing technical difficulties. Uber has failed in managing the transition, and is now lashing out at the central bank, the government and even their own presumably stupid “slow” consumers.”
Some have complained that Paytm’s services are not up to mark. One Uber customer said, “I deposited 4000 in my paytm account on Sunday. But I’m unable to use it. Unable to login. Unable to get any reply from paytm on email / phone / social media. Can’t we have some other option apart from paytm”
While it’s easy to be a cop-out and blame Indian regulations, Uber should have worked on making wallet payments an easier process. The 2FA is not a new regulation and was, in fact, present even before Uber came to India. The company then chose not to adhere to these regulations and evaded the authentication and business/ payment model.
Also, Uber isn’t the only one using a wallet system. Olacabs, which is a rapidly-growing radio-cab service, uses an in-app wallet which allows users to recharge their wallets. Similarly, Meru cabs partnered with Citrus Pay for cashless travel. Using online wallets, customers can load money in them via a debit card, credit card or net banking and the money gets debited automatically after every ride.
DELHI UBER DRIVER ACCUSED OF RAPE SPEAKS IN COURT
The driver accused of raping a young woman in December after she hailed his car via the Uber Technologies smartphone app said on Tuesday in a special court that he “did not commit the crime” and that the case against him “is false.”
“I don’t know why this case has been registered against me,” Uber taxi driver Shiv Kumar Yadav said in front of Additional Sessions Judge Kaveri Baweja in New Delhi.
The statement by the 32-year-old Mr. Yadav, who is accused of assaulting and raping a 26-year-old woman after she booked his cab using the Uber smartphone app, comes after the special fast-track court formally charged him last month. The charges include endangering a woman’s life while raping her, kidnapping with intent to compel her for marriage, criminally intimidating and causing hurt.
Mr. Yadav has pleaded not guilty to all the charges. He remains in police custody.
The Uber service lets people use an app installed on smartphones to hail nearby car-service drivers. The alleged attack led to a ban on Uber in New Delhi and other cities including Mumbai, Hyderabad and Bangalore. Those bans remain in effect.
Last month Uber promised to make significant changes to its business model by applying to become a licensed radio taxi operator in Delhi. Previously, Uber maintained that it is a service that connects drivers with riders, and not a traditional taxi operator.
Last week, however, that application was rejected by the New Delhi Transport Department, which said application didn’t include the required plans for a call center or proof of an office address, among other things.
In the wake of the alleged rape, Uber promised to make changes to improve safety. In its latest statement last month, Uber said the company is “only allowing driver-partners who have undergone re-verification of their police clearance in the last six weeks” to offer driving services via the Uber app.
On Tuesday, Mr. Yadav said he was being “brutally beaten by the police” while in custody. “I have scratches all over my body,” he said in court.
Mr. Yadav was arrested in his hometown, Mathura, in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh on Dec. 7 after he was accused by the 26-year-old woman of sexually assaulting her when she was returning home from a dinner party on the night of Dec. 6. During his court appearance Tuesday, Mr. Yadav said that the young woman started crying after getting into his car at about 10 p.m. on Dec. 6, the night the incident allegedly took place.
“When I asked her as to why she was crying, she told me it was none of my business. Thereafter, I kept quiet,” Mr. Yadav told the court.
“I just had a casual chat like one would have with customers. I did not do anything wrong with her,” he said. Trial court proceedings in the case started Jan. 15.
The officer in charge of the investigation, Madhur Verma, has described the trial proceedings “as possibly the fastest ever.” India’s Law Ministry set up five fast-track courts in the national capital to handle rape cases after a 23-year-old physiotherapy student was gang-raped and murdered by five men on a bus in December 2012.
In Mr. Yadav’s case, the court so far has heard from 28 prosecution witnesses including the alleged victim. Mr. Yadav’s counsel, Aalok Dwivedi, is expected to call his witnesses on Feb. 4, after which the court will fix a date to begin final arguments.
The court is expected to deliver a verdict next week.
CMT REPORT (Corruption, Money Laundering & Terrorism]
The Public Notice information has been collected from various sources
including but not limited to: The Courts,
1] INFORMATION ON
DESIGNATED PARTY
No 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 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.63.88 |
|
|
1 |
Rs.97.20 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.72.51 |
INFORMATION DETAILS
|
Analysis Done by
: |
KAR |
|
|
|
|
Report Prepared
by : |
JYTK |
SCORE & RATING EXPLANATIONS
|
SCORE FACTORS |
RANGE |
POINTS |
|
HISTORY |
1~10 |
4 |
|
PAID-UP CAPITAL |
1~10 |
7 |
|
OPERATING SCALE |
1~10 |
7 |
|
FINANCIAL
CONDITION |
|
|
|
--BUSINESS SCALE |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--PROFITABILIRY |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--LIQUIDITY |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--LEVERAGE |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--RESERVES |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--CREDIT LINES |
1~10 |
7 |
|
--MARGINS |
-5~5 |
-- |
|
DEMERIT POINTS |
|
|
|
--BANK CHARGES |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--LITIGATION |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--OTHER ADVERSE INFORMATION |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
MERIT POINTS |
|
|
|
--SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--EXPORT ACTIVITIES |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--AFFILIATION |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
--LISTED |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--OTHER MERIT FACTORS |
YES/NO |
YES |
|
DEFAULTER
|
|
|
|
--RBI |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
--EPF |
YES/NO |
NO |
|
TOTAL |
|
60 |
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 |
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 |
|
-- |
NB |
New Business |
-- |
This report is issued at your request without any
risk and responsibility on the part of MIRA INFORM PRIVATE LIMITED (MIPL)
or its officials.