By Arret Jatta
The report of the Public Enterprise Committee of the National Assembly on the Activities and Audited Financial Statements of State Own Enterprises for the year ended 31st December 2019 and 2020 has detected mischief in Gamtel tax transaction.
According the report auditors review of the payable balances, amounting to D46, 219,250.18 was recognized from sales as output VAT (GL Code 7451), out of which only D6, 677,492.13 was paid to GRA during the year under review and the closing liability now rises to D167, 226,672.50.
Laying the report before Parliamentarians, Chairperson of the committee and member for Brikama North, Hon Lamin J Sanneh, said the committee recommends that Board and Management ensure all tax obligations are reported and paid on time to avoid penalties.
Hon Sanneh stated that during the audit it was noted that a GAMTEL staff with employment number 3-292 was involved in a fraudulent act causing the company to lose D102, 000.00 and upon termination she was contracted for a period of 1year dated 1st July 2020 to 30th June 2021.
The Committee recommends the Board ensure a fraud policy is put in place as deterrence for violations and anyone found committing a fraudulent act should face disciplinary actions.
The Chair further said the Auditors observed that GAMTEL acquired 15Ge internet backup from SONATEL provided it to the operators/ISPs and invoiced them based on the capacity requested by the operators.
“This was done at the time they anticipated repair work was to take place on the ACE Banjul station. However, the amount recognized as revenue in the year 2020 is D4, 652,198.49, which is far less than the total invoices amount sent to the operators.”
They recommend that the Board and Management ensure all the revenue transactions of the company are recorded through the accrual base procedure as per the accounting policy manual. The Board should ensure the invoice amount is reconciled against cash recognized in the Books of Accounts and update the Committee accordingly.
He also noted that the laptops selected for the auditor’s samples were not tagged. “This creates difficulties and ambiguities in verifying them. The codes assigned to the laptops on the fixed asset register vary with those held at the IT department. Location description of many assets also has some deficiencies.”
He also stated that the committee recommended that the board and management ensure that an update is made on the record for laptops that are with the regional managers because the fixed asset register is not properly labeled/updatedaccording to the physical locations.
He added that the serial on the laptop should be as it is with the IT unit and must be entered on the fixed asset register or use a unique reference code for each laptop.
