Company Law India: Read latest Company law news & updates, acts, circular, notifications & articles issued by MCA amendment in companies Act 2013. Article on Loans Company formation XBRL, Schedule VI IFRS.
Company Law : Explains Directors’ Report requirements under the Companies Act, 2013, including AOC-1, AOC-2, CSR disclosures, applicability, s...
Company Law : Article reviews Indian and UK court rulings stressing verification of AI-generated legal research and rejecting reliance on fake j...
Company Law : Learn which companies must file MGT-7 or MGT-7A, when MGT-8 certification is mandatory, and how the Companies (Management and Admi...
Company Law : The Companies Act, 2013 requires most companies to hold four Board Meetings annually, while OPCs, Small Companies, and Dormant Com...
Company Law : This guide provides a complete AGM compliance tracker covering pre-AGM, AGM-day, post-AGM, and IEPF obligations under the Companie...
Company Law : MCA has cautioned stakeholders against phishing calls, WhatsApp messages, emails, fake websites, and ZIP attachments impersonating...
Company Law : ICSI has urged PESB to recognize Company Secretaries as eligible for Board-level and Functional Director positions in CPSEs. The r...
Company Law : ICSI has urged the Government to amend the law to allow Company Secretaries in Practice to appear before DRTs and DRATs. It argues...
Company Law : ICSI has urged the MCA to ensure eligible companies comply with Section 203 by appointing Whole-time Company Secretaries. The repr...
Company Law : ICSI has requested the MCA to grant compliance relaxations following technical disruptions caused by the Data Centre fire. The pro...
Company Law : Delhi HC lays down a framework on the right to be forgotten, directing de-indexing in eligible cases while balancing privacy, open...
Company Law : CCI closed proceedings holding dealership termination and contractual disputes did not establish violations of Sections 3(4) or 4 ...
Company Law : NCLAT held resignation, renewal of working capital facilities and alleged novation did not discharge a continuing personal guarant...
Company Law : Madhya Pradesh HC dismissed a winding up petition, holding that a bona fide dispute over liability required adjudication before th...
Company Law : Orissa HC upheld an ex parte interim injunction, holding it should rest on Order XXXIX CPC instead of Section 151, and declined Ar...
Company Law : MCA extends the Companies Compliance Facilitation Scheme, 2026 up to 31 August 2026 due to data center restoration following the...
Company Law : MCA has allowed companies to file Form DPT-3 for FY 2025-26 without additional fees until 31 July 2026 due to disruptions caused b...
Company Law : MCA notifies the New Development Bank under Section 2(11)(ii) of the Companies Act, 2013, specifying it as a body corporate for th...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai penalized a director after Form AOC-4 contained an incorrect AGM due date. The order emphasizes that directors are resp...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty after finding that an individual held two Director Identification Numbers in violation of Section 155...
The case addressed prolonged possession of two DINs due to an inadvertent mistake. The authority imposed a ₹48,958 penalty, holding that duration of default justifies financial consequences despite bona fide intent.
This case examines whether an unintentional duplicate DIN attracts penalties under company law. The authority held that liability is strict, imposing a ₹50,000 penalty despite acknowledging bona fide conduct.
Holding more than one DIN is treated as a continuing default under law. Even genuine mistakes attract penalties, though early correction may reduce the financial impact.
The framework restricts distribution of gifts at or in connection with general meetings. The ruling highlights that such practices may influence shareholder decisions and are therefore non-compliant.
The scheme provides a last opportunity for defaulting companies to file pending returns and financial statements with reduced penalties. It emphasizes that failure to comply within the window may lead to strict regulatory action, including strike-off.
ROC Mumbai penalized the authorized signatory for incorrect AOC-4 filing where consolidated financial statements were omitted. The ruling reinforces accountability for accuracy in e-form certifications under company law.
The case involved allotment of shares before complete payment and issues with fund traceability. The authority held it as non-compliance and imposed penalties, treating it as a technical breach.
Failure to disclose registered valuer details in explanatory statements led to penalties under Section 450. Each instance was treated as a separate violation, resulting in significant cumulative penalties.
The authority imposed a penalty on the director for incorrect disclosure in Form AOC-4. It held that the signatory is responsible for accuracy of filings, even if the error was inadvertent.
The authority ruled that failure to mention CIN on documents was not a continuing offence. Penalty was limited to specific instances, significantly reducing liability.
