SEBI introduced a uniform 30-day lag for sharing and using market price data for educational purposes after concerns over misuse of recent market information. The revised rules aim to balance investor education and regulatory safeguards.
ROC Delhi imposed penalties under Section 450 after a company failed to appoint an internal auditor despite crossing prescribed financial limits. The order held that absence of professional guidnce is not a valid ground for waiver of penalty.
ROC Delhi imposed penalties after a company failed to form Audit and Nomination Committees despite crossing the prescribed turnover threshold. The order held that statutory committee requirements under Sections 177 and 178 are mandatory.
ROC Kolkata imposed penalties after a company incorrectly reported that consolidated financial statements were not applicable in its AOC-4 XBRL filing. The order held that inaccurate MCA filings attract liability even if the mistake is later admitted and rectified.
DGFT amended the Handbook of Procedures by limiting gold imports under Advance Authorisation to a maximum of 100 kilograms. The changes aim to strengthen regulatory oversight and ensure better compliance monitoring.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company and its directors for not appointing a woman director after turnover crossed ₹300 crore. The order clarifies that operational difficulties and delays in identifying candidates cannot excuse statutory non-compliance.
ROC Uttar Pradesh imposed penalties under Section 134(8) after finding that the company’s directors failed to provide comments on statutory auditor qualifications. The company and officers were held liable for non-compliance with Section 134(3)(f) of the Companies Act.
ROC Uttar Pradesh penalised the company and officers for failing to provide comments on auditor qualifications in the Board’s Report for FY 2019-20. The order held the company in violation of Section 134(3)(f) of the Companies Act.
The Registrar of Companies found that the company remained without a whole-time Company Secretary from 2014 to 2020 in violation of mandatory legal requirements. Penalties were imposed on both the company and directors under Section 203(5).
The Registrar of Companies held that non-filing of financial statements by the due date constituted a contravention of Section 137(1) of the Companies Act. Monetary penalties were imposed on both the company and officers in default.