Meyer Apparel’s record is one of a business that has shrunk to near-zero revenue while carrying a fully eroded net worth. The auditor has signed clean opinions for seven straight years even as the company’s own CARO annexure states it cannot meet its liabilities as they fall due. Governance is punctured by a foreign promoter who has refused to dematerialise shares for at least seven years and a sole executive director re-appointed annually on unchanged terms throughout the losses.
Key findings
- The business has burned cash and posted losses for six straight years
Major- PAT was negative every year from FY21 through FY26, with FY26 posting a loss of ₹0.79 crore. Operating cash flow was negative in four of those six years, and free cash flow was negative in FY26, FY24, and FY23. ROCE collapsed from 5.70% in FY24 to 2.26% in FY26, and capital work-in-progress stood at zero with plant and equipment at just ₹0.03 crore. - Clean audit opinions sit alongside seven years of going-concern warnings
Major- The statutory auditor issued an unqualified opinion each year from FY20 through FY26. Every one of those reports draws attention to a Material Uncertainty Related to Going Concern, citing accumulated losses that reached ₹62.96 crore by March 2026 and current liabilities exceeding current assets by ₹33.56 crore. The CARO report for FY26 states a material uncertainty exists that the company cannot meet its liabilities as they fall due within one year. - Related-party loan limits rise annually but drawdowns stay nil
Minor- Shareholder approval for inter-corporate loans and related-party transactions was raised to ₹2.75 crore each for FY26, yet the Board’s Report for every year since FY21 states no material related-party transactions and no loans under Section 186 were made. A loan to Whole-Time Director Mr. Gajender Kumar Sharma, originally approved by shareholders as ₹2.00 lakh in FY2019-20, had an outstanding balance of ₹1.32 lakh as of March 2026 after repeated rescheduling. - A ₹29.6 crore customs dispute is provided but unresolved for 30 years
Minor- A customs duty demand of ₹29.6 crore including interest and penalty, relating to 1994-95, is pending before the Supreme Court and a provision was made in the financial year ending March 31, 2016. A separate trademark attachment order for ₹33.47 lakhs was passed on 14 July 2025, and the company disclosed on 14 May 2026 that it had settled more than decade old litigations without admitting liability.
What to watch
- Settlement of decade-old litigations. The financial impact will be reflected in the June 2026 quarter results, as disclosed on 14 May 2026.
- Customs duty appeal. The ₹29.6 crore demand, fully provided in FY2015-16, awaits outcome before the Supreme Court.
- RPT and loan limits. Whether the ₹2.75 crore limits approved at the AGM on 10 July 2026 result in actual drawdowns during FY27, given nil utilisation reported historically.
- Going-concern finding. The next CARO report for FY27 will confirm whether the material-uncertainty finding on meeting liabilities within one year persists or escalates (D1 period: FY2025-26).
Bottom line: This is a disclosed record of a business that has all but stopped operating, with a net worth fully consumed by accumulated losses and a balance sheet that cannot meet its bills. The auditor’s clean opinion sits in tension with its own going-concern warning. Watch the Supreme Court customs outcome, the settlement impact in the June quarter, and whether the newly approved loan limits are drawn, because at this scale, even small cash movements change the picture.