Company Law : This FAQ examines the statutory authorities empowered to convene an Extraordinary General Meeting under the Companies Act, 2013. I...
Company Law : The 2025 amendment replaces annual DIR-3 KYC filings with a triennial compliance framework. Directors now need to file KYC once ev...
Company Law : The article explains when private companies can rely on MCA exemptions to borrow through board approval alone. It highlights the b...
Company Law : The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law...
Company Law : The scheme provides a last opportunity for defaulting companies to file pending returns and financial statements with reduced pena...
Company Law : The MCA has widened CSR eligibility by recognizing subscriptions to Zero Coupon Zero Principal Instruments as a valid CSR activity...
Company Law : The initiative addresses inefficiencies in the current filing system and proposes consolidation and automation. It highlights a sh...
Company Law : NFRA found major deficiencies in audit documentation and archival practices. The report highlights the need for stronger controls ...
Company Law : The inspection report highlights deficiencies in audit documentation, independence monitoring and compliance with auditing standar...
Company Law : The regulator found that the audit firm lacked an effective monitoring mechanism to ensure firmwide independence policies were pro...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Sh. Laxit Awla under Section 165 of Companies Act, 2013, for exceeding directorship limits. Details on violatio...
Corporate Law : That the period of lockdown ordered by the Central Government and the State Governments including the period as may be extended ei...
Company Law : The MCA has amended the valuation rules to require Registered Valuer Organisations to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of ₹25 ...
Company Law : The Registrar of Companies penalized the company and its authorized signatory after an incorrect document was attached with Form A...
Company Law : MCA amends Schedule VII of the Companies Act to include subscription to zero coupon zero principal instruments on Social Stock Exc...
Company Law : MCA has amended the CSR Rules to recognize zero coupon zero principal instruments issued by Social Stock Exchange-listed NPOs. The...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai held that repeated return of official notices proved non-maintenance of a registered office under Section 12(1) of the ...
ROC Mumbai penalized a director for possessing two Director Identification Numbers in contravention of Section 155 of the Companies Act, 2013. The authority held that even inadvertent allotment of duplicate DIN attracts penalty under Section 159.
The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law. It highlights stricter compliance requirements for listed companies under SEBI regulations.
The ROC rejected the company’s defense that temporary reconstruction and business disputes justified the absence of staff and signboards. It held that statutory obligations under Section 12 remain mandatory at all times.
The adjudication order clarifies that incomplete filing of statutory resolutions on the MCA portal constitutes non-compliance. The company failed to rectify the defect despite notices and hearing opportunities.
ROC Mumbai-II imposed a penalty on a director for incorrect disclosure in Form AOC-4 XBRL filed for FY 2023-24. The authority held that authorised signatories are responsible for accuracy of e-form contents under Rule 8(3).
ROC Mumbai penalised a company and its directors for failing to disclose a related party loan transaction in the Board’s Report and Form AOC-4. The authority held that omission of the transaction violated Section 134(3)(h) of the Companies Act.
ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty under Section 159 after a director was found holding two DINs simultaneously in violation of Section 155 of the Companies Act. The authority noted that the duplicate DIN was generated because of a system error during portal migration but still treated it as a continuing default.
ROC Mumbai imposed penalties on a listed company and its officers for failing to file Form MR-2 within the prescribed timeline for appointment of a non-resident Whole Time Director. The adjudicating authority held that the 878-day delay violated Rule 7(3) read with Sections 196 and 201 of the Companies Act.
ROC Mumbai penalized directors for treating special business as ordinary business in an AGM notice to avoid mandatory explanatory disclosures. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 102 of the Companies Act.
ROC Mumbai penalized a company and its directors for failing to maintain consecutively numbered pages in Board and General Meeting minutes books. The order highlights mandatory compliance with Secretarial Standard-1 under the Companies Act.
