Milestones

Year Particulars
1994 Incorporated as "NRE Stocknet Ltd." as Public Limited Company at Kolkata, West Bengal,
on April 22, 1994 under the Companies Act, 1956, to carry on the business of hiring all kinds of
plants, machinery and equipments.
1998 company changed its name to Net Interactive Limited vide fresh certification of
incorporation dated on June 16, 1998
2000 Increase in Authorised Capital from Rs. 50 lac to Rs. 200 Lacs to facilitate expansion in
activities.
2001 Further Increase in Authorised Capital from RS. 200 Lacs to Rs. 350 Lacs
2004 Conceived the project envisaging manufacture of Lam coke. considering the promoters
experience in the field of Coke manufacturing. LAM Coke plant of 50000 MTPA was set up at
Gujarat. The company obtained sanction limit of Rs.1570 Lacs from State Bank of Indore.
2005 By availing the fund as mentioned above set up its first plant in kutch Gujarat adopting new
generation Bee-Hive Tata Type Technology. The plant commenced operations in Aug. 2005.
2005 Company obtained another sanction aggregating Rs. 6300 Lacs from State Bank of India
for setting up of Refractory Unit and expanding Lam coke capacity to 1,75,000 MTPA.
2005 Increase in Authorised Capital to Rs. 750 Lacs thereby further infusion of capital by
promoters.
2005 The company changed its name to Austral Coke and projects Limited so as to represent the
nature of activity.
2006 Austral successfully implemented both the above mentioned projects in 2006 and, become
the reputed supplier of LAM coke in the Industry.
2007 Increase in Authorised Capital to Rs. 5000 Lacs
2007 In September 2007, ACPL signed a contract with its group company M/s Gremach
Infrastructure Equipments & Projects Ltd. For mining, prospecting and exploration of coal at
Maputo Mozambique.

2007 ACPL emerged as profit making entity with satisfactory track record with lenders and
regular dividend payouts.
2008 ACPL has increased the capacity to 3,75,000 MTPA by adding another expansion of
2,00,000 MTPA
2009
- Austral Coke & Projects Limited has informed that Mr. Anupam Jaiswal has been appointed
w.e.f May 02, 2009 as the Company Secretary and Compliance Officer of Austral Coke &
Projects Limited.
- Austral Coke & Projects Ltd has appointed Mr. Alok Bansal, as an additional Director (non
executive Director) in the Company w.e.f. October 30, 2009.
2010 -Company has changed its name from Austral Coke & Projects Ltd. to Greenearth
Resources and Projects Ltd.
2015 - The Register office has Shifted from Natural Nest apartment, Flat no-6C,Rajarhat, New
Township Road & VIP Road Connector, Kolkata-700157 to G-12, C-7 Mangoe Lane, Kolkata :
700001.
The causes and the solutions alike can be rooted to the following 5 major categories:
1) Personal Ethics
2) Decision Making Processes
3) Organizational Culture
4) Unrealistic Performance Goals
5) Leadership
First, business ethics are not completely different from personal ethics which are the generally
accepted principles of right
and wrong governing the conduct of individuals. Our personal ethical code exerts a profound
influence on the way we behave as businesspeople. It follows that the first step to establishing a
strong sense of business ethics is fir a society to emphasize strong personal ethics.
Many studies of unethical behavior in a business setting have concluded that sometimes
corporate do not realize they are
behaving unethically primarily because they simply fail put a thought if the decision that they
have made is ethical or not. The fault lies in the processes that dont incorporate ethical
considerations into business decision making.
One of the major causes of corporate frauds is that most organizational cultures have been
deemphasizing business ethics
(as seen in the cases above), thus reducing all decisions to the purely economic level. Values and
norms shape the culture of a corporate entity, and culture had an important influence on the
ethics of business decision making.

Unrealistic performance goals and pressure from the parent company, the economy and the
society at large which can be
attained only by cutting corners or acting in an unethical manner contribute to a large extent of
the corporate frauds ( main
case: Satyam).
But the main root of all lies in the leaders of the corporate entity. Leaders help establish the
culture of the organization, and they set the examples that others follow. Other employees in the
corporate often adopt and adapt to the methodology or behavior that the leaders enact and if the
leaders dont behave in an ethical manner, there is a major chance the employees of the
corporate will not either.
Lessons that can be learnt
An organizational culture can legitimize behavior that the society would judge as unethical,
particularly when it is mixed
with a focus on unrealistic performance goals, such as maximizing short term performance, no
matter what the costs. In
such situations, there is a greater than average chance that the middle level managers will violate
their own personal ethics
and engage in unethical behavior.
Some Legal Solutions
Business Ethics and Whistle-Blowing
It is a widely recognized fact that efficient corporate governance is rooted in the ethical behavior
of the top leadership in the
organization. One of the important ways of introducing a culture of ethics and values is a whistle
blower policy. The
Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) mandates a whistleblowing mechanism in Clause
49 of the Listing
Agreement that deals with corporate governance norms. In effect since 2003, however, it has not
been as helpful as desired.
The Public Interest Disclosure Bill, 2010, has further augmented the awareness about
whistleblowing activities and the
need to provide adequate protection to whistleblowers. But, there is still a lot of work to be done
to prevent or detect the
increasing cases of corporate fraud. A report by Singapore Press Holdings Limited reveals that
almost half of the AsiaPacific companies are confident of their internal fraud controls. However, according to a report
by PriceWaterhouse
Coopers, only 16 per cent of economic crimes in the region are detected by risk-management
systems. The vast majority of
incidences of economic crime, says the report, are detected by accident, tip-off, internal and
external audit.
Suggestions for the Way Ahead
Hiring and Promotion
Companies can give potential employees psychological tests to try to discern their ethical
predisposition, and they can check
with their prior employees regarding someones reputation. (The latter is already a common
practice.)

Not only should firms try and hire people with strong sense of personal ethics, but it is also in the
interest of the
prospective employees to find out about the ethical climate of the firm that they are going to join.
6. Organizational Culture and Leadership
Firms must explicitly articulate values that emphasize ethical behavior. Many firms do this now
by drafting a Code of Ethics
which is a formal statement of the ethical priorities that the business adheres to and the Code of
Ethics draws heavily upon
documents such as the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is grounded in
Kantian and rights-based theories of
moral philosophy. For example, according to Unilevers code of ethics it does not tolerate
substandard working conditions,
use child labor or give bribes under any circumstances. It also refers to respecting the dignity of
employees, a statement that
is grounded in Kantian Ethics.
Twelfth AIMS International Conference on Management 925
Leaders in the firms must give life and values to those words by repeatedly emphasizing the
importance of ethics and then
acting on them, meaning, using every relevant opportunity to stress the importance of business
ethics and making sure the key
business decisions not only make good economic sense but are also ethical. For example, at GE,
former CEO Jack Welch has
described how he reviewed the performance of managers, dividing them into several groups.
This included over performers
who displayed the right values and were singled-out for advancement and bonuses and over
performers who displayed the
wrong values and were let go. He was not willing to tolerate leaders within the company who
didnt act in accordance with
the central values of the company, even if they were in all other respects skilled managers.
7. Ethics Officer
To make sure that a firm behaves in an ethical manner, a number of firms now have ethical
officers. These individuals are
responsible for making sure that all the employees are trained to be ethically aware, that ethical
considerations enter the
business-decision making process, and that the companys code of ethics is adhered to. Ethics
officers may also be
responsible for auditing decision making to make sure they are consistent with this code. They
also act as internal
ombudsman person with responsibility for handling confidential inquiries from the employees,
investigating complaints,
reporting findings and making recommendations for change. Example, some Tata group
companies like Tata Sons, Tata Steel
and Tata Teleservices are among the few which have ethics officers in India. For instance Tata
Sons, the main holding
company of the group, in February appointed Mukund Rajan as chief spokesperson, brand
custodian and chief ethics officer

for the group.

8. Summary
Corporate frauds represent social and economic liability. The failing ethical values both at the
individual and organizational
levels are root cause of this tragic malady. A deep social revolution touching the core of human
hearts and a strong leadership
capable enough to infuse discipline at all levels can be the panacea for getting out of the rot.
Infusing innovative technology
tools to arrest the white color frauds are the necessity of the day. Organizations are needed to
nurture and promote ethical
culture in the organizations apart from subjecting themselves to ethical audit at periodical
intervals

Board of Directors
Managing Director

M M Damani

Chairman

Sunil Jawahar Lal Mandloi

Director

Shailbala Sunil Mandloi

Company Secretary
Scam at Austral Coke

Aarti B Chitroda

SEBI unearths Rs 1000 Cr scam at Austral Coke

by SEBI Order | 1st-Sep-09 19:20
SEBI in an order said today that the IT department has unearthed bogus transactions worth Rs
1000 crore at Austral Coke. SEBI finds Prima Facie evidence of corporate fraud
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ORDER
DIRECTIONS UNDER SECTIONS 11, 11(4) AND 11B OF THE SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992 AND REGULATION 11 OF THE SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA (PROHIBITION OF FRAUDULENT AND UNFAIR
TRADE PRACTICES RELATING TO SECURITIES MARKET) REGULATIONS, 2003,
AGAINST AUSTRAL COKE AND PROJECTS LIMITED
1. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as SEBI) received a letter
dated August 26, 2009 from the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad.
The said letter enclosed a copy of letter dated August 26, 2009 from the Deputy Director of
Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad. The Income Tax Department, vide the aforesaid letters

informed
SEBI of the manipulation in the books of accounts of Austral Coke and Projects Limited
(hereinafter referred to as Austral or the company). The company is listed
at the National Stock Exchange of India Limited and the Bombay Stock Exchange Limited.
2. The Income Tax Department inter alia informed that :
a) searches carried out by the Income Tax Department at the residential and business premises
of Austral group on June 23, 2009, revealed serious irregularities in the books of accounts of the
company.
b) bogus purchases running into hundred of crores had been debited to the books of accounts of
the company.
c) all the purchases were claimed to have been made from 29 nonexistent concerns, all floated by
one Ajitkumar Jindal of Kolkata.
d) Mr. Ajitkumar Jindal, in his statement recorded under Section 133 A of the Income Tax Act,
1961, admitted having provided bogus bills for the purchase of raw material as well as plant and
machinery to the company.
e) such purchases identified so far by the Income Tax Department totaled up to Rs.553 crores.
f) the company had also shown sales of around Rs.495 crores to the concerns floated by Mr.
Ajitkumar Jindal and to other concerns having the same address as the concerns of Mr. Ajitkumar
Jindal, which apparently were bogus.
g) the company had raised funds through an Initial Public Offering (IPO) in the year 2008. That a
part of the funds raised through the said IPO were shown in the books of the company as utilized
towards purchase of capital goods from the concerns of Mr. Ajitkumar Jindal, which were
found to be bogus and as stated above.
3. The financial year-wise break-up of such purchases and sales shown in the books of accounts
of the company, as informed by Income Tax Department is as below:
Description F.Y. 2006-07 (Rs.) F.Y. 2007-08 (Rs.) F.Y. 2008-09 (Rs.) Total (Rs.)
Purchases 12.87 145.27 394.83 552.97
Sales - 100.04 394.71 494.75
(Rupees in crores)
4. I note that the company came out with an IPO for 72,60,000 shares in the year 2008. The said
issue opened on August 07, 2008 and closed on August 13,2008 and the company raised a total
of Rs.142.296 crores in the said IPO. I note that the Income Tax Department had observed that a
part of the funds raised through the IPO were shown in the books of the company as utilized
towards

purchase of capital goods from the concerns of Mr. Ajitkumar Jindal, which have been found to
be bogus. From the aforesaid letters, I find that a serious case has
been made against the company for making fictitious entries in its accounts, procuring bogus
bills etc.
5. I note that the Bombay Stock Exchange Limited has been intimated (on August 24, 2009) that
a meeting of the Board of Directors of the company will be held on September 03, 2009, inter
alia, to discuss the raising of funds through
Qualified Institutional Placement up to US$ 200 Million; to consider interim dividend for F.Y.
2009-10; to consider any bonus shares and increase in authorized capital. Further, from a
newspaper report (The Economic Times, dated
August 25, 2009), I find that the company has said its board will meet on September 3 to
consider raising $200 million (nearly Rs 970.22 crore) by private
placement of shares with qualified institutional buyers. The board would also consider bonus
issue and to increase the authorized share capital of the company.
6. As aforesaid, serious observations have been made by the Income Tax Department against the
company, regarding its financials for the financial years 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009.
Therefore, SEBI has ordered an
investigation in the matter to investigate inter alia into the buying, selling or otherwise dealing in
the securities of the company.
7. By manipulating the accounts/records, the company has prima facie played fraud on its
shareholders. Further, the act of the company prima facie operated or would operate as a fraud
upon any person who deals in the securities of the company. Thus, from the aforementioned acts,
the company appears to have prima facie violated the provisions of Regulation 3 & 4 of the
Securities and
Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to
Securities Market) Regulations, 2003. Taking into consideration the
seriousness of the alleged manipulation in the books of accounts of the company, also being
satisfied that any further issue of securities as proposed by the
company will not be in the interest of the investors/shareholders and also in the
light of the fact that the company has convened a board meeting for the purposes of considering
further issue of shares, SEBI as the regulator of the securities
market is satisfied that it is necessary to immediately intervene to prevent further activities which
are detrimental to the interests of the shareholders of the company and the integrity of the
securities market.

8. In view of the foregoing, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under Section 19 of the
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 read with Sections 11, 11(4) and 11B thereof
and Regulation 11 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and
Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003, by way of ad interim exparte order, hereby prohibit Austral Coke and Projects Limited from raising any further capital in
any manner, directly or indirectly, whatsoever till further orders.
9. If aggrieved, Austral Coke and Projects Limited may file its objections to this order, and, if it
so desires, may appear for a personal hearing before the Securities