Dohan and Company 7700 North Kendall Drive, 200
Certified Public Accountants Miami, Florida 33156-7564
A Professional Association Telephone: (305) 274-1366
Facsimile: (305) 274-1368
E-mail: info@uscpa.com
Office of the Chief Accountant
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20549
Dear Sir and/or Madam:
We have read the March 7, 2007 statements of Neptune Industries, Inc. about
our firm that is included under Item 4 in its Form 8-K filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. We do not agree with certain portions
of the statement, as stated below:
Our reports on the financial statements of the Company for the last two
fiscal years were modified as to uncertainty. There were no disagreements
with the Company as to accounting principles or practices, financial
statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedures, in reference to the
audited financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2006.
We have also read the January 5, 2007 statements of Neptune Industries,
Inc. about our firm that included under Item5 in it Amended Form 10-QSB/A
filed with the securities and Exchange Commission. We do not agree with
certain portions of the statement, as stated below:
There were items requested by our Firm to change on Form 10-KSB, which we
did not consider non-material, such as
1. the ?Consolidated Statements of Operations? did not foot.
2. the ?Statements of Stockholders? Equity (Deficiency in Assets)? does
not agree with amounts reported on ?Consolidated Balance Sheets?.
The audit partner did not take an extended maternity as stated by Neptune
Industries, Inc., but was admitted to the hospital on October 12, 2006 for
a medical emergency and was discharged until October 25, 2006. The Form
10-KSB was filed on October 13, 2006, the day following the audit partner?s
admittance to the hospital. Therefore, there was no ?concealment? from the
Company since the audit partner was available until the day before the
financial statements were filed. Again contrary to Neptune?s claims, the
audit was not managed by a ?junior accountant? with no experience. The
audit partner was available at all pertinent and material times and oversaw
the audit until its conclusion.
As the Form 10-KSB was read and comments were suggested, subsequent
readings did not reflect prior suggested changes or comments. We made
requested changes on grammar, punctuation, style and formatting to help the
Company comply with the ?Plain English? rules recommended by the SEC.
In reference to Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2006, on
November 8, 2006, we received the initial documentation and information
from Neptune Industries, Inc. to be able to perform our review procedures.
On November 9, 2006, we requested a copy of the Company?s QuickBooks
backup. On November 15, 2006, we requested additional information to
satisfy ourselves as to balances in the financial statements as well as
various inquiries. Our review procedures go through several levels of
review (engagement partner, concurring review) and therefore would receive
comments from several individuals. The Company also questioned some of our
inquiries in a response to us dated November 16, 2006, stating ??somewhat
concerned by the nature of some of these questions, since this is only a
quarterly review and not another audit.? We are required to perform
certain procedures and make inquiries as part of a quarterly review. The
questions asked and materials requested were material to our review of the
quarterly financial statements.
We also suggested changes which the Company considered ?non-material? which
we consider material and essential to conducting a proper review such as,
financial statements that foot and equity balances that agree to those of
the audited financial statements.
Yours truly,
/s/ Irene S. Salum, CPA
Dohan and Company, CPAs, P.A.
Att. Various PDF copies of e-mails