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...
I am directed to say that at the time of incorporation of companies where one of the objects is to carry on the business of Banking, Insurance or to practice the profession of Chartered Accountancy, Cost Accountancy & Company Secretaries, then the concerned Registrar of Companies shall incorporate the same only on production of in-principle approval / NOC from the concerned regulator/professional Institutes.
To file a petition u/s 397, 398 of the Act, one has to fulfil the requirement as contemplated under the above provision of law. Unless and until the above criterion is fulfilled, the petition is not maintainable. The persons who can qualify to file the petition are (i) in case the company is having a share capital, not less than 100 members; or (ii) not less than 1/10th of the total number of its members, whichever is less.
Under section 399 of the Act, statute has made it clear that 10 per cent shareholding is requisite qualification to invoke jurisdiction under sections 397 and 398 of the Act. If the joint shareholding of first petitioner has become half, then certainly this petition is short of the requisite qualification that is required under section 399 of the Act.
This is an application for the winding up of Tantia Constructions Ltd. (hereinafter the company). It is made by a Malaysian company by the name of Road Builder (M) Sdn Bhd, (hereinafter the petitioning creditor). These two companies entered into a joint venture agreement on 14th July, 2003 for setting up a project in the State of Mizoram. After sometime, the company pulled out of it. They entered into a different relationship. The petitioning creditor agreed, on 15th December, 2007, to sell to the company plant, machinery and vehicles at a total consideration of Rs. 2,75,73,614.41/-.
There is no conflict between the statutory relief of winding up and of the contractual right to have disputes settled by arbitration. Once a bona fide defence is shown to exist, arbitration will be the efficacious and proper remedy. Where, however, the defence is mala fide and a moonshine, arbitrable disputes would not exist and the company judge would have the power to pass appropriate orders Madhya Pradesh Iron & Steel Co. (supra). Existence of an arbitration clause does not oust the jurisdiction of this court to either entertain or to admit a petition for winding up.
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has implemented MCA21 e-Governance Project. The Project is aimed at enhancing the service level efficiencies and bringing about certainty and speed in the operations of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, particularly with regard to the delivery of all the Registry related services rendered by Registrar of Companies as defined under the Companies Act, 1956.
XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) is another advanced reporting language of the XML family. XBRL ensures that the figures reported to government authorities and other organisation does not remain dormant piece of printed papers but these figures can be used in data analysis.
The crux of the controversy is whether the appellant which is a Company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 is entitled to have two kinds of memberships as aforesaid. The only difference in the rights of the two kinds of members is that while the Member Exporters have a right to elect and to be elected as office bearers of the appellant, the Registered Exporters have no such right.
I am directed to invite a reference to Ministry’s circular No. 19 and 20 of 2011 issued on 02.05.2011 laying down certain procedure to regulate cases wherein filing of conflicting returns with regard to appointment of Directors or change of Director/Directors was laid down. In the light of some specific cases wherein it appears that either there was lack of consent of the removed/changed director or due process of Law were not followed, it has been decided to supercede the circulars.
In the present case the petitioner No. l was removed as director and this Bench presumes that the convening and holding of general meeting in which he was removed is legal and valid. So far as para 11.3 of the reliefs is concerned that the R1-company be directed to be operated only with the joint signature of the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 is concerned a similar relief is sought by the applicants in the main petition at para 9.3. Therefore, pending adjudication of main petition, I do not consider it to grant the reliefs at the interim stage. So far as reliefs at para 11.4 is concerned I am not inclined to grant the stay in conducting the shareholders and Board of directors meetings which are to be conducted by the company in accordance with the law or the company may thinks fit to call the meetings in its best interest.
