RIL’s September quarter net profit increased marginally, even as its total revenues declined 4.3% due to lower crude prices and volumes
Reliance Industries Ltd on Monday reported a marginally higher second quarter net profit, even as its total revenues declined 4.3% due to lower crude prices and volumes.
For the quarter to end-September, the Mukesh Ambani-led petroleum conglomerate said its net profit on consolidated base, increased 1.7% to Rs5,972 crore from Rs5,873 crore, while its total revenues, including sales, declined 4.3% to Rs1.13 lakh crore from Rs1.18 lakh crore, for the same quarter a year ago.
Commenting on the results, Mukesh Ambani, Chairman and Managing Director of RIL, said, "The refining and petrochemical businesses, once again delivered robust results, outperforming regional industry benchmarks. Renewed optimism in the domestic economy augurs well for business and consumer confidence particularly against the backdrop of continuing concerns on global economic growth. We expect to create significant value for our stakeholders over the next 12-18 months as we complete our large investment programme across energy and consumer businesses."
RIL said its second quarter operating profit increased 10.8% to Rs9,818 crore from Rs8,865 crore in September 2013.
As on 30 September 2014, the company said it had an outstanding debt of Rs1.42 lakh crore, while its cash and cash equivalents were at Rs83,456 crore.
RIL said, its second quarter revenues from the refining and marketing segment decreased by 5.9% to Rs1.04 lakh crore due to softness in crude oil prices and lower crude processing. RIL’s gross refining margins (GRM) for the quarter stood at $8.3 per bbl as against $7.7 per bbl in the corresponding period of the previous year. The company said its premium during the September quarter, over the regional benchmark, widened to $3.5 a bbl, as compared to $2.5 per bbl in the corresponding period of the previous year. This was primarily aided by wider crude differentials and sourcing advantage.
RIL closed flat on Monday, at Rs957 on the BSE, while the benchmark Sensex ended the day marginally higher at 26,384.
According to an RTI reply received by Shailesh Gandhi, the Home Ministry has even failed to reply to a proposal aimed at allowing the police to purchase fuel needed for the 72 speed boats
After the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, Maharashtra bought about 72 speedboats to beef up vigilance on the seafront. However, all the boats are lying idle because there is no fuel to run them. The Home Ministry has failed to so much as reply, for over 18 months, to a proposal aimed at allowing the police to buy fuel for the speedboats.
According to a reply received by Shailesh Gandhi, a former Central Information Commissioner, to a query under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Director General of Police (DGP) sent a proposal to the Home Ministry to give them powers to purchase fuel for these speedboats on 16 March 2013, but there has been no reply even after 18 months.
"I am pursuing the issue of the abject failure of the State government to follow Act 21 of 2006 which mandates that no file should remain without a decision for over 90 days. Citizens should put pressure on the government to follow this Act," he said.
Mr Gandhi, said, "The speedboats are lying idle with no fuel. Officials who fail to obey the law and render an anti-terrorist measure dysfunctional are making the job of the terrorists easy. We must act in time and this is an eye opener of how delays in taking action can greatly impact our security and make a Rs32 crore purchase, useless junk."
Earlier in 2012, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) also slammed the Maharashtra Government for not making sufficient provisions for operating the Police speedboats. “Each boat consumes nearly 200 litres of petrol every day. Since there is no provision for the expenditure on the fuel and maintenance, most of the boats are lying idle, defeating the whole purpose,” the PAC had stated in its report tabled in the state Assembly.
SEBI said, the share transfer of Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite was through sham transactions and that DLF and its six directors, including KP Singh, employed a plan, scheme, design and device to camouflage association of DLF with these three units
Market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has barred DLF Ltd and its directors including chairman Kushal Pal (KP) Singh from accessing the securities market for three years. SEBI also prohibited them from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities, directly or indirectly, or in any other manner.
In an order issued on 10 October 2014, Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, whole time member of SEBI, said, "...the process of share transfer of three subsidiaries of DLF in Sudipti Estates Pvt Ltd, Shalika Estate Developers Pvt Ltd and Felicite Builders & Construction Pvt Ltd was through sham transactions as alleged in the show cause notice (SCN) and that the Noticees employed a plan, scheme, design and device to camouflage the association of DLF with its three subsidiaries, namely, Felicite, Shalika and Sudipti. In this case under such plan, scheme, design and device, the Noticees suppressed several material information in the draft Red Herring Prospectus (RHP)/ Prospectus of DLF and actively concealed the fact about filing of FIR against Sudipti and others. In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that the case of active and deliberate suppression of any material information so as to mislead and defraud the investors in the securities market in connection with the issue of shares of DLF in its initial public offering (IPO) is clearly made out in this case."
Other than KP Singh, who is the executive chairman of DLF, SEBI barred Rajiv Singh, vice chairman and son of KP Singh, TC Goyal, managing director, Pia Singh, whole time director and younger daughter of the DLF chief, Kameshwar Swarup, executive director for legal, GS Talwar, director and son-in-law of KP Singh and Ramesh Sanka, chief financial officer (CFO) of DLF.
In 2007, Kimsuk Krishna Sinha, a businessman from Delhi had alleged that DLF and its directors and agents had lured and compelled him to transfer certain plots of land and did not fulfil the promise of developing the land and providing him higher returns.
Sinha had alleged that Sudipti, DLF Home Developers Ltd and DLF Estate Developers Ltd, were sister concerns and were part of the DLF group.
DLF, however, said that Sudipti was a separate legal entity, owned and controlled by different individuals. The construction major in its DRHP, filed for a public issue in May 2006, had mentioned that Sudipti was its associate company.
The DRHP however, had been withdrawn and a fresh prospectus was filed in January 2007, in which Sudipti was not mentioned as an associate.
Following a 2011 direction of the Delhi High Court to look into Sinha's complaint against the DLF Group and Sudipti Estates, SEBI passed an order to carry out investigation into the allegations levelled by Sinha.
Here are the undisputed facts, mentioned by SEBI...
a) Prior to 29-30 November 2006, entire shareholding of the three companies, which are Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite, which were incorporated on 26 March 2006, was held by DLF's two or all three wholly owned subsidiaries viz. DEDL, DHDL and DRDL.
b) In the first DRHP filed by DLF on 11 May 2006, which was withdrawn on 31 August 2006, Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite were shown as subsidiaries of DLF.
c) On 29 November 2006, the entire shareholding of DEDL, DHDL and DRDL in Felicite was sold to three persons who were spouses of employees of DLF.
d) On 30 November 2006, the entire shareholding of DEDL and DHDL in Sudipti was sold to Shalika and on the same day the entire shareholding of DEDL, DHDL and DRDL in Shalika was sold to Felicite.
e) On 2 January 2007, DLF filed the second DRHP with SEBI along with a document, which indicated that as a result of the above transfers of shares, DLF's three wholly owned subsidiaries viz. DEDL, DHDL and DRDL were dissociated from Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite and that Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite were not the subsidiaries of DLF as on the date of filing of second DRHP.
f) After receipt of observations from SEBI on the second DRHP, DLF opened its IPO for subscription by issuing the RHP. In the final RHP/ Prospectus, Sudipti, Shalika and Felicite were not disclosed as subsidiaries of DLF.
SEBI's Agarwal, stated in his order, "…the violations as found in this case are grave and have larger implications on the safety and integrity of the securities market. In my view, for the serious contraventions as found in the instant case, effective deterrent actions to safeguard the market integrity are required. It therefore becomes incumbent to deal with contraventions, digression and demeanour of the erring Noticees sternly and take appropriate actions for effective deterrence."