| Terms/Rights attached to Equity Shares
The Company is having only one class of Equity shares haves par vale of
Rs 10/- each
Reconciliation of the shares outstanding at the beginning and at the
end of the reporting period
As per the records of the Company including its register of
Shareholders/Members and other declarations received from the
shareholders regarding beneficial interest, the above Shareholding
represents both legal and beneficial ownership of shores
1. Corporate In Formation:
Popular Estate Management Limited is a public company domiciled in
India, It is listed an Bambay Stock Exchange. The Company -s engaged In
construction and engineering activities etc,
2. Basts of Preparation:
The financial statements of the company have been prepared In
accondance with generally accepted accounting principles in India
(Indian GAAP) The company has prepared these financial statements to
company in all material respects with the accounting standards notified
under the Companies Act, 2013 The financial Statements have been
prepared on an accrual basis are under the historical cost convention
method.
The accounting policies adopted in the preparatrion of financial
statements are consistent with those of previous year, except for the
change in accounting policy explained below
3. RELATED PARTY DISCLOSURES:
As per Accounting Standard 18, the disclosures of transactions with the
related parties, disclosing relationship, nature transaction and
quantum or transaction are as under:
4. The company operates only in one segment i.e. construction and
engineering and hence there iS no other primary reportable segment as
required by AS 17 on Segment Reporting as Issued by ICAI
5.Extra Ordinary Items
(A) (I) Shree Someshwara co.op. Housing Society Ltd., had appointed the
company as a developer for development of the land of the society
situated at Thaltej, Taluka Dascrol, in the registration district and
sub-district Ahmedabad, bearing survey no. 310 admeasuring about 24411
sq. metrs. by development agreement dated 29/3/2007. As per clause no.
6.11 of development agreement, if the development of the project because
of the circumstances beyond the control of the developer i.e. company or
otherwise could not be commenced and/or executed or completed for any
reason whatsoever, the developer i.e. company is entitled to receive
compensation / damages or defamation charges for damages of goodwill of
developer in the event of termination of development agreement and as
per clause no.6.12 of the said development agreement the developer i.e.
company is entitled for preemptive right to purchase the said land of
the society.
(II) During the year under consider ation the society has decided to
set out the said land without development and hence the developer i.e.
the company Is untitled for the compensation for damages per
development agreement entered into With the society, Hence, the
termination agreement is entered into between the company and the
society vide Lemination agreement dated 20/3/2015 and as per the
termination agreement the company is entitled to receive Rs.
17,41,89,300/- as compersation/ damages for the re inguishment of right
to sue for preemptive purchase right as a "developer and organizer" of
the scheme In terms of development agreement dated 29/3/2007 directly
from the purchaser of the said land.
(B) (1) Saral Samudayik Kheti Sahkari Mandii Ltd., had appointed the
company as a Project Consultant & Organisers for the development of the
land bearing survey no.182 admeasuring about 4452 sq.mtr. Survey no.185
admeasuring about 2529 sq.mtr Survey no. 186 admeasuring about 2428 sq.
mtr., survey no.187 admeasuring about 1148 sq.mtr, and survey no,179
admeasuring about 4957 sq.mtr. Totaling to18514 sq.mtr, situated at
village Amball, Taluka Dascroi, District and Sub-district Ahmedabad as
per agreement dated 31/3/2007. The Sahkan Mandali had appointed the
company as a project consultant and organizer for development of the
land of the BahkanMendak for the project of cultivation and agricultural
activities. As per clause no.16 of agreement, if the project of Framing
because of the circumstances beyond the control of the "Project
Consultant and Organiser" i.e. company or otherwise could not be
commenced and/or executed or completed for any reason whatsoever, the
Project Consultant and Organiser i.e. compary is entitled to receive
compensation / damages or defamation charges for damages of goodwill of
"Project Consultant and Organiser" In the event of termination of
agreement and as per Clause no.17 of the said agreement the "Project
Consultant and Organiser" i.e. company is entitled for preemptive right
to purchase the said land of the SahkanMendai .
(II) The disputes and differences arose between Sahkari mandall and the
company in respect of the rights and obligation of the parties arising
out of the agreement entered Into Between me parlies dated 31/3/2007 and
Sahkari Mandali has Sell out the land (except blockiio:179) without
development and terminated the development agreement of 2011. During the
year under consideration Sahkari Mandali has decided to sen out allowed
the land at block no.179 without development and hence the developer
l.e. the company is entitled for the comparisation for damages as per
agreement entered Into with Sahkarl Mandai Hence, the termination
agreement Is entered into between the company and the Sahkari Mandall
vide term Malian agreement dated 20/3/2015 and as per the termination
agreement the company Is entitled to receive Rs. 2,57,8 2,100/- as
compensation/damages for the reliquishment of right to sue for
preemptive purchase right as a "Project Consultant and Organiser" of the
scheme In terms of agreement dated 31/3/2007 directly from the purchaser
of the said land.
(C) The Advocate / legal counsel of the company have advised that as per
the provisions of section 6(e) of the Transfer of Property Act, right to
sue is not a property. Now the definition of capital asset u/s.2 (14) of
the I.T. Act, 1961 that capital asset means a "property of every and"
therfore, in order to Constitute a capital asset, there must he a
property and if such property forms part of capital asset is transferred
than the profits and gains arising therefrom would be chargeable to tax
U/S.45 of the l.T Act, 1961. since right to sue is not a property, it is
not a capital asset as per provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961, such a
compensation/damages amounting to Rs. 17,41,89,300/- and
Rs.2,57,62,100/- respectively is a capital receipt not subject to
Income-tax. The facts of the company's case in respect of compensation
received for relinquishment of their right to sue is squarely covered by
facts and principles and ratio laid dawn by the Hon'ble jurisdictional
Gujarat High Court In the case of Baroda Cement & chemicals Ltd. vs. CIT
158 itr 636 (Guj) and also by the decision or HOn'ble Delhi High Court
in the case or CIT vs, J. Dalmia, 146 ITR 215 (Del.) as well as the
decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ashoka
Marketing Ltd. 164 ITR 664 (Cal.).
6. Contingent liabilities:
(Rs. in lacs)
Particulars As at 31st As at 31st
March, 2015 March, 2014
Claims against the group not - -
acknowledged as debts
Income Tax matters 362 90 120.92
7. The Company Is in the Process of appointing the Full time Company
Secretary and Chief Financial Officer In accordance with the
requirement of Companies Act 2013 Contingent liability arising on
account of such non complaince Is not provided for being not
quantifiable.
8. Previous Year's figures have been regrouped, rearranged and
rescheduled wherever necessary to reflect its true nature.
|