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 : Learn about CARO, 2020 guidelines for reporting loans, guarantees, security, and investments by companies to ensure compliance and...
Company Law : Ensure compliance with updated Reporting on Audit Trail under Rule 11(g) of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 for 202...
Company Law : Explore various threshold limits under the Companies Act, 2013, with detailed compliance requirements for listed, public, and priv...
Company Law : Understand the latest changes in DIR-3 KYC, including rules for updating email IDs and mobile numbers, fees, and filing details. L...
Company Law : Understand the nuances of signing board reports and financial statements under Companies Act and SEBI (LODR). Learn who must sign ...
Company Law : Explore ICMAI detailed analysis of the Govt. committee report on enhancing cost audit effectiveness. Read insights & recommendatio...
Company Law : Discover the challenges faced by the Institute of Company Secretaries of India in filing Form DPT-3 for FY 2023-24. Learn about te...
Company Law : Explore the challenges faced by newly incorporated companies regarding mandatory ESI and EPF registrations in India, with proposed...
Company Law : Delve into the NFRA order controversy with detailed analysis on penalty imposition, opinion disparities, and key issues. Gain insi...
Company Law : Explore the issues and challenges in processing MCA forms at CPC. Learn about the proposed solutions for timely approval and the i...
Company Law : It is not the scope & objective of IBC to include Banks Financial Institutions who advanced loans to Home Buyers to be considered ...
Company Law : Explore the Calcutta High Court's decision in Uphealth Holdings, INC. Vs Dr. Syed Sabahat Azim & Ors. regarding the applicability ...
Company Law : Read the full NCLT judgment where Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited sought to withdraw its merger with Sony Groups, impacting ...
Company Law : Explore the implications of issuing duplicate debenture certificates under the Companies Act, 2013. Learn about legal remedies, as...
Company Law : Explore the detailed judgment in the Grand Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Nitin Batra & Ors. case by NCLAT Delhi, including key argument...
Company Law : Discover the key changes in the Nidhi (Amendment) Rules, 2024. Learn how the new rules impact Nidhi companies and their naming con...
Company Law : General Circular No- 07/2024: Forms IEPF-3 merges with IEPF-4 and IEPF-7 with IEPF-1 in MCA Version 3. Simplifying compliance for ...
Company Law : Circular No. 06/2024 MCA has waived the additional fee for filing various IEPF e-forms (IEPF-1, IEPF-1A, IEPF-2, IEPF-4) and e-ver...
Company Law : IEPF Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Amendment Rules, 2024: Streamlining online transfers and updated forms. Re...
Company Law : Check out the latest Companies (Incorporation) Amendment Rules 2024 issued by Ministry of Corporate Affairs, omitting word Nidhi f...
A petition for winding up can be maintained at the behest of a creditor, whether secured or unsecured. This is evident from the provisions of section 439(1)(d). Under sub-section (2) of section 439, among others, a secured creditor is to be deemed to be a creditor within the meaning of clause (b) of sub section (1).
The alternative prayer that RLB should be directed to be wound up, since its entire substratum has disappeared, will require a detailed examination of several relevant factors, all of which are not before the Court. Nothing precludes RLB from seeking winding up in accordance with law in appropriate proceedings by placing the full facts before the Court which can then be responded to by the OL, the RD and other interested parties including creditors. Given the pleadings in the present application, it is not possible to undertake that exercise at this stage.
Though recognising that the company court (now CLB) would be the court of exclusive jurisdiction for applications for rectification of register of members, it is held that if the issues arose whether the plaintiff was the owner of the shares, whether there was fraud or forgery or there was dispute on the very title of the shares, those issues would be beyond the jurisdiction of the company court and would have to be decided by the civil court. This would be upon the issues that arise in an application. It may be mentioned that an issue arises when a material fact is alleged and disputed. Hence, mere mention of fraud may not take the matter out of the exclusive jurisdiction granted by the statute to the CLB, but when the “very title to the shares” is challenged and the court sees that that is at least prima facie shown, the civil court’s jurisdiction would not stand barred.
The other ground on which the CLB interfered with the decision at the board meeting held on 31-10-2012 was that the notices of the board meeting were issued at a time when the Respondent was not in the country and was stuck in New Jersey, USA, which was admittedly hit by a hurricane. While the notice was properly delivered to the Respondent, its request for adjournment of the meeting could have been easily accommodated by the Appellants. Nevertheless, they went ahead and held the meeting. This has been sought to be remedied by the impugned order of the CLB by directing that a fresh board meeting be convened. In the facts and circumstances, the CLB was justified in issuing the said direction. What however cannot be sustained in law is the direction that in the fresh board meeting, effect must be given to clause 6.2 of the JVA. That portion of the impugned order is, therefore, set aside.
The Regional Director or Registrd of Companies or any other officer of the Central Government shall be authorised to make complaints under sub-section (2) of section 58AAA of the Act.
The fact that in the 80th AGM held on 30th July 2007, the audited accounts for the financial years ended 31st March 2004, 31st March 2005 and 31st March 2006 were placed and adopted makes it clear that any default in that regard by BSMCL stands condoned. No other shareholder has objected to those accounts. They are taken to be the audited accounts. Neither the ROC nor the RD, nor the OL raised any objection. The objection of Mr. H.K. Chadha that adjustment entries have to be made in the accounts prepared by BRS for an earlier period to arrive at the correct picture cannot, in the above circumstances, be countenanced. No material has been placed on record by Mr. H.K. Chadha to substantiate the plea of non-preparation of the audited accounts of the above financial years.
Further it is clarified that fee payable for forms on/till 16-01-2013 will remain payable along with additional fee and relaxation of any additional fee will be considered for forms on or after 17-01-2013
Cancellation or Deactivation of DIN.- The Central Government or Regional Director (Northern Region), Noida or any officer authorised by the Regional Director, upon being satisfied on verification of particulars of proof attached with the application received from any person seeking cancellation or deactivation of DIN, in case –
Power to relax — Where the Central Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do, it may, by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing . and in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission, relax any of the provisions of these rules with respect to any class or category of persons.
It is observed from the Budget 2013-14 authorizes Union Govt. to raise Rs. 50,000 crores (Tax Free Bonds). These bonds carry a lower rate of interest, currently in the range of 6.75% to 7.50% which is tax free under section 10(15) (iv)(h) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such bonds were also provided for in Budget 2012-13, but the response had been poor due to restrictions under section 372A(3) of the Companies Act, 1956.
