5116112026-01-012026-03-315116112026-03-315116112025-03-315116112025-04-012026-03-315116112026-01-012026-03-31in-capmkt:OtherExpenses1Member5116112025-04-012026-03-31in-capmkt:OtherExpenses1Member5116112026-03-31OtherNoncurrentFinancialAssetsDomain15116112026-03-31OtherNoncurrentAssetsDomain15116112026-03-31OtherCurrentFinancialAssetsDomain15116112026-03-31OtherCurrentAssetsDomain15116112026-03-31OtherCurrentFinancialLiabilitiesDomain15116112026-03-31OtherCurrentLiabilitiesDomain15116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditorDomain15116112026-01-012026-03-31in-capmkt:AuditedMember5116112026-03-31in-capmkt:AuditedMember5116112026-01-012026-03-31in-capmkt:AdjustedMember5116112026-03-31in-capmkt:AdjustedMember5116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditQualification15116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditQualification25116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditQualification35116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditQualification45116112026-01-012026-03-31AuditQualification5iso4217:INRiso4217:INRxbrli:shares511611DCMFINSERVNOTLISTEDINE891B01012DCM FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITEDMain BoardEquity2025-04-012026-03-312026-05-192026-05-04INRLakhsQuarterlyFourth quarterSingle segmentFINANCE & LEASING2026-05-1915:00:002026-05-1916:15:00trueCash Flow IndirectStatement on impact of audit qualification2026-01-012026-03-31AuditedConsolidated08040008040000008870008000-205500026570001497000-6930000-69300005700005700000-12630000000-126300036000-1227000-1259000-4000-1223000-400022125100010-0.06-0.0600-0.06-0.062025-04-012026-03-31AuditedConsolidated0556200055620000005449000743000161000913100015484000-99220000-992200003190003190000-102410000000-10241000-17000-10258000-10238000-3000-10255000-300022125100010-731038000-0.46-0.4600-0.46-0.46Other Expenses2657000Other Expenses913100096500000150000038893000390430001457100054579000067940000172300031023000042970004383700017700044014000104476000203069000221251000-731038000-509787000277000-509510000207700002077000014610009181000314120006722460000007328000679574000156300030000681167000712579000203069000Other non-current financial assets38893000Other non-current assets14571000Other current financial assets4297000Other current assets177000Other current financial liabilities7328000Other current liabilities156300074300000077000099000-1533000131120000033400001610000-1045000160000-202000002900052190000-2440000004200006456000-346600000000-34660000000000000000000000000000002900052190000052480000000000009430000074200000-16850009700009700016260001723000-480002300012000-600036000-17000AuditedQualified opinionM/s. V Sahai Tripathi & Co.true2029-02-28556200055620001548400015484000-10241000-10241000-0.46-0.46203069000203069000712579000712579000-509510000-643510000Justice Anil Kumar* as one man committee was appointed vide order dated:- 3rd September, 2015 by the Honble High Court of Delhi to scrutinize the list of depositors and other claimants and to take steps enumerated hereinafter with the view to resolve at-least some of the disputes. The one-man committee submitted its report on to Honble High Court of Delhi on 22nd April, 2016.Taking cognizance of the report, Honble High Court of Delhi on 10th August, 2017 accepted the recommendation of one-man committee enumerated in the report. Under Scheme of One-Man Committee, Interest of Rs 235 lakhs are payable to Debenture Holders and Rs 1,448 lakhs are payable to Fixed Depositors under Phase-2 of Schedule of Payments laid down by One Man Committee. Presently the said committee has waived any further payment of Interest to Fixed Depositors, Debenture-holders and other lenders, however on complete liquidation of properties and investments, if any surplus remains after payment to all stakeholder creditors, then further payment of Interest would be decided. All stakeholders creditors which are covered under scheme has given its consent to the scheme. No provision of Rs. 1,683 lakhs as laid down under the scheme towards Interest on Debentures and Fixed Deposits, have been provided in the consolidated financial statements on the outstanding amount of Debentures and Fixed Deposits. <br></br> Had interest of Rs. 1,683 lakhs been provided for in the financial statements of year ending 31st March 2018 on outstanding amount of Debentures and Fixed Deposits, the Net Profit before tax would have been lowered by Rs. 1,683 Lakhs and Net Profit after tax would have been lowered by Rs. 1,340 Lakhs as at 31st March, 2018. The cumulative net loss as well as Current Liabilities as at 31st March, 2026 would have been higher by Rs 1,340 lakhs. <br></br> During the current financial year, the Company has paid said interest of Rs. 7.35 lakhs , but has accounted for the same as finance cost in the current periods profit and loss account instead of classifying and disclosing it as a prior period item as required by Ind AS 8, Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors. <br></br> *The Honble High Court of Delhi has appointed Mr. Laxmi Kant Gaur, District Judge (Retd.) vide its order dated 29th July 2021, as the One Man Committee in place of Honble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar (in view of his unfortunate demise).The One Man Committee would continue from the stage at which the exercise assigned to the One Man Committee by the High Court stands, at the stage when Honble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar unfortunately expired. The agenda of the One Man Committee would be as per the order dated 3rd September, 2015, read with subsequent orders passed, if any, in that regard. <br></br> Qualified opinionRepetitiveProvision of interest depends upon availability of funds and it will be paid in the second phase as per report of One Man Committee. So, the company had not recognized provision for interest during the financial year 2017-18. Now the 2nd phase has started and as per the report of the One Man Committee the company has started payment of interest to those whom it is payable as per the scheme. So, interest paid in our case cannot be considered as prior period cost.NANANAFor redemption of B series debentures of Rs. 2014.98 Lakhs debenture redemption reserve is required to be created. Debenture redemption reserve of Rs. 2014.98 Lakhs has not been created due to insufficient profits. Qualified opinionRepetitiveNon-creation of debenture redemption reserve. The same cannot be created due to insufficient profits in the past against the redemption of debenture. This has no impact on financial results of the company as redemption reserve is to be created out of Reserve and Surplus available with the company. Company has commenced repayments in the earlier years as well as in the current Year as per directions of the Honble High Court of Delhi vide order dated 10th Aug, 2017 and recommendations of One Man Committee. Company is still not creating Debenture redemption Reserve for the same reason that it has no sufficient profits to do so.NANANAThe value of assets charged as security in favor of banks, debenture-holders & financial institutions may have been depleted over a period of time. The depletion, if any, has not yet been ascertained by the Company. To the extent of shortfall, if any, the liability is unsecured, whereas the same has been shown as secured.Qualified opinionRepetitiveNot quantified by the AuditorDepletion in the value of Assets charged to Banks/Institution and Debentures in Para iii relates to ascertainment of Security against Debentures and Bank Loan, which could not be ascertained. Management is of the view that Repayment to Banks/ Institution and Debenture holders is being made as per Restructuring scheme and company has already made payments to Banks and Institution under Phase I and Phase II so the matter of depletion of security will not affect the repayment to them under the scheme.Due to charge created earlier on assets against dues to the banks, and debenture holders these have been shown as secured and there is no financial impact. Qualification (iii) <br></br> <br></br> The value of assets charged as security in favor of banks, debenture holders & financial institutions have depleted over a period of time. This qualification has bearing on disclosure of liabilities as Secured Vs Unsecured. The depletion has not yet been ascertained by the Company. It needs to ascertain for appropriate disclosure as per Schedule III of Companies Act 2013. Accordingly, to the extent shortfall, if any, the liability is unsecured, the same has been shown as secured which is incorrect disclosure. The same to be read as per audit report. <br></br> Balance confirmation of security deposits provided, trade receivables, some bank balances, FD balances with bank, rent receivables, other advances, borrowings, balances payable to related parties and other receivables and payables have not been received from the parties/persons concerned. In the absence of balance confirmations, the closing balances as per books of accounts have been incorporated in the financial statements and have been shown, unless otherwise stated by the management about its recoverability in the financials including considering the NPA Provisions, are good for recovery/payment. Time barred debts under the Limitations Act have not been separately ascertained and written off or provided for. In the absence of such confirmation & corresponding reconciliation, it is not feasible for us to determine financial impact on the consolidated financial statements and the amount referred as receivable/payable in the consolidated financial statements can differ.Qualified opinionRepetitiveNot quantified by the AuditorIn view of litigation with creditors as mentioned in the iii above, it is not possible to obtain the balance confirmations from all creditors. <br></br> <br></br> Similarly, the company is in litigation with various lease and hire purchase customers also and the matters are sub-judice, hence confirmations and acknowledgements are not feasible from them also. <br></br> As mentioned in the qualification related to balance confirmation that it's not feasible to get the confirmation from Creditors as well as from debtors and receivable due to various cases against them. Management cannot determine the impact due to non-confirmation of balances. However, wherever required, necessary provision for NPAs have already been created in accordance with RBI guidelines and no further financial impact can be estimated.Qualification (iv) <br></br> <br></br> Balance confirmations are essential component of auditing. Third Party confirmations confirms the management point of view and balances considered by it for financial statements. If third party does not agree with the balance then it is necessary to prepare reconciliation and examine whether any claim of income or charge skipped to be recorded. In the absence of such confirmations it was not feasible for us to determine any financial impact which could be there. The balances considered by it are the initial balances in 1998 and adjusted thereafter if any payment has been made. The qualifications has been determined by considering the claims lodged initially by such parties. Fresh Restructuring scheme submitted in the year 2004 with Honble Delhi High Court and no attempt has been made by the management to get balance confirmations of security deposits provided, trade receivables, some bank balances, FD balances with bank, rent receivables, other advances, borrowings, balances payable to related parties and other receivables and payables. Accordingly it is not feasible for us ascertain whether any claim or income or charge has been skipped to be recorded which could have financial impact. The same to be read as per audit report. <br></br> Contingent liabilities and Other Commitments <br></br> <br></br> Due to dispute with the builder namely M/s NBCC Ltd. from which the company had purchased an office premises in the year 1995, regarding a claim of Rs. 288.29 Lakhs on account of increase in super area and certain other expenditure which the builder i.e. M/s NBCC Ltd. had incurred and the same is pending in arbitration. Breakup of the amount of Rs. 288.29 Lakhs mentioned supra is as follows: <br></br> <br></br> S. No. Description Amount in lakhs <br></br> 1. Difference in super area Vs. provisional area 229.28 <br></br> 2. Claim of property tax 3.19 <br></br> 3. Claim of ground rent 21.67 <br></br> 4. Allied charges 7.82 <br></br> 5. Augmentation of Electric sub station 1.33 <br></br> 6. Loss of profit 20.00 <br></br> 7. Arbitration cost 5.00 <br></br> TOTAL 288.29 <br></br> <br></br> During the financial year ending March 31, 2021, the award was given in respect of dispute that has arisen between NBCC Ltd. (Claimant) and DCM Financial Services Limited (Respondent) in relation to sale of Commercial Space-Upper Ground Floor NBCC Place, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi by the Claimant to the respondent. The summary position of award is as under: <br></br> Party Amount Claimed (in lakhs) Awarded (in lakhs) <br></br> NBCC Ltd.- Claimant 434.95 41.06 <br></br> DCM Financial Services Limited - Counter Claimant/Respondent 3,269.50 78.97 <br></br> <br></br> In addition to the above, Interest @ 10% is payable by both the parties on their respective amounts. <br></br> <br></br> <br></br> In addition to the above, Interest @ 10% is payable by both the parties on their respective amounts. <br></br> That whereas NBCC has filed objections to the award in Delhi High Court in December 2020 and the same appears to be lying in objections. <br></br> That DCM has also filed objection in Delhi High Court and the same has not being listed so far. <br></br> <br></br> Qualified opinionRepetitiveCompany has received a favorable award but the same has been challenged by both parties in High Court, so no provision of liability is made in this regard is made.NANANANASOMALI TRIVEDISANJAY SAHNIVISHWAS TRIPATHINIDHI DEVESHWAR, WHOLETIME DIRECTORNEW DELHI2026-05-19