An accurate cash total can still support an incomplete recommendation. Directors need to see restrictions, operating commitments and collection uncertainty before deciding whether a distribution is affordable.
Finance should make the commitment visible before the amount becomes persuasive. A bank balance may be restricted, a new order may extend an old credit problem, and a group charge may contain both a useful service and an unexplained allocation. I want the people making the decision to see those differences without having to reconstruct the account themselves.
I lead finance at Kulvani Industrial Software in Jaipur. We license and support scheduling software used by industrial businesses, with direct sales and eight distributors. The company is majority owned by Ravendahl Systems, a fictional German software group, while Indian founder shareholders and employees retain minority stakes. That gives my work two perspectives: the parent needs a coherent view of its investment, and the Indian company needs decisions grounded in the obligations and cash available here. A consolidated number cannot do both jobs on its own.
My thirty-one-year career began with accounts at an engineering-supplies business. I later worked in software distribution, where a successful sales conversation could leave a difficult credit position behind it. At Kulvani I moved through commercial finance and financial control before becoming CFO in October 2021. I now lead twenty-six colleagues through four heads and report to the managing director, with a functional line to the group CFO. I present financial choices to directors, but I do not hold a board seat or claim their decision-making authority as my own.
The examples on this site concern commitments that can be concealed by otherwise accurate figures. We deferred a proposed distribution after separating restricted deposits from usable cash. We declined further credit to an overdue distributor even though it had a new order ready. We challenged a parent-service allocation while accepting the shared support we could substantiate. And we held a payment when changed bank details could not be independently confirmed. Each decision required finance to explain a consequence that someone else would prefer to avoid.
₹23 crore in bank balances did not fund a ₹12 crore distribution
₹9 crore was held in restricted performance-security deposits, leaving ₹14 crore usable. The next ninety-day operating forecast added ₹8 crore receipts and required ₹18 crore payments, leaving ₹4 crore before any distribution. Directors deferred the proposed ₹12 crore payment; the decision did not create new cash or change reported profit.
A new order did not settle the earlier account
One distributor owed ₹3.1 crore overdue and sought another ₹0.9 crore credit extension to support a proposed ₹1.6 crore order. We refused incremental credit while maintaining existing customer support obligations. ₹2.4 crore was collected over four months; ₹0.7 crore remained outstanding and subject to separate review.
The parent charge needed an activity explanation
We examined a proposed ₹11.4 crore management-budget allocation for parent services. The agreed basis supported ₹6.8 crore of directly attributable services and ₹2.1 crore of shared support. The remaining ₹2.5 crore was removed from the India allocation. This was a budgeting decision, not a claim about tax treatment or a universal allocation formula.
Current focus
I am improving the connection between our treasury forecast, distributor exposure and the decisions presented to the board. The same commitments should be visible when sales requests a credit exception, when the parent discusses a distribution and when finance reports liquidity. I also want our four finance heads to explain the assumptions behind their recommendations in ordinary language, so that a disagreement can be resolved on its substance rather than through the apparent authority of a spreadsheet.
Conversations I welcome
I am considering a first external non-executive role in a specialist software or industrial-services company. My provisional capacity is twenty-two days a year, dependent on employer clearance, conflicts and the proposed work. I would contribute financial scrutiny and an understanding of subsidiary relationships, while respecting the difference between advising an executive team and serving on a board.
Beyond the page
The record behind the perspective.
Formation
Bachelor of Commerce, Financial AccountingHarveli Commerce College · 1995
Since Nikhil became CFO in 2021, I have relied on him to show where a proposal changes our obligations. He does not stop at an objection; he explains the alternative and the consequence we would accept by choosing it.
Savera MelvaniManaging director, Kulvani Industrial Software; executive colleague since 2021The full record ↗
Contact
I am considering a first external non-executive role in a specialist software or industrial-services company. My provisional capacity is twenty-two days a year, dependent on employer clearance, conflicts and the proposed work. I would contribute financial scrutiny and an understanding of subsidiary relationships, while respecting the difference between advising an executive team and serving on a board.
