Regulatory correspondence returned undelivered led to action under registered office compliance rules. The ruling underscores that companies must maintain a functional address to receive statutory communications.
The issue was whether leave encashment exemption should be capped at ₹3 lakh or ₹25 lakh. ITAT held that the enhanced ₹25 lakh limit applies, making the entire ₹13.12 lakh fully exempt.
The authority held that failure to disclose related party contracts and justifications in the Board’s Report violates statutory transparency norms. A personal monetary penalty was imposed on the responsible director.
The issue was whether daily pooja and religious ceremonies qualify as charitable activities. ITAT held that worship-centric activities are purely religious and do not meet the statutory test for charitable registration.
Non-compliance with mandatory board composition norms led to heavy penalties. Both the company and the officer were held liable under company law.
The Registrar found that statutory notices and court decrees were returned undelivered, proving non-maintenance of the registered office. The key takeaway is that companies and directors face the maximum penalty for such defaults.
A delay of 13 days in filing Form MGT-15 attracted penalties on both the company and key managerial personnel. The key takeaway is strict enforcement of AGM compliance timelines.
The regulator examined a failure to disclose full allottee particulars in the return of allotment. It held that incomplete disclosures violate securities allotment rules and attract penalty under the Companies Act.
The adjudicating authority held that non-receipt of official correspondence proved a breach of the statutory duty to maintain a registered office. Penalties were imposed on the company and its directors under Section 12(8) of the Companies Act.
The AO disallowed a weighted deduction relying only on a subsequent CBDT list. ITAT ruled that factual verification and proof of bogus donation are mandatory before denying the claim.
