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...
A prolonged violation of Independent Director requirements led to penalties on both the company and its officer. The ruling underscores consequences of continuous default under corporate law.
The issue involved non-compliance with Section 150(1) due to improper appointment of an independent director. The authority held the company and officer liable, emphasizing mandatory selection from the IICA databank.
The ROC imposed penalties for appointing an Independent Director not listed in the IICA databank. The ruling highlights strict compliance with eligibility requirements under Section 150(1).
The ROC penalized the company for not appointing an Independent Director from the IICA databank. The ruling highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 150(1) of the Companies Act.
The authority penalized the company for delayed filing of MGT-6 beyond the prescribed timeline. It held that even a short delay constitutes a violation under Section 89(7).
The authority penalized the company for failing to file MGT-14 within 30 days of passing a resolution. It held that delayed compliance still attracts penalties under Section 117(2).
A massive delay in filing BEN-2 for significant beneficial ownership led to maximum penalties. The authority held that prolonged non-compliance attracts strict penal consequences.
The issue was whether the insolvency application was time-barred. The Tribunal held that balance sheet entries and revival letters extend limitation under law. The key takeaway is that acknowledgment of debt can revive limitation periods.
The tribunal held that mere suspicion or possibility of fraud without supporting evidence cannot justify action under Section 66 of the IBC. The ruling underscores the need for concrete proof in alleging fraudulent conduct.
The ROC held that no penalty is leviable as the company filed its annual return within 30 days of the notice. The ruling highlights that timely compliance can nullify penal consequences under the Companies Act.
