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 issue was failure to appoint a CFO after crossing the capital threshold. The takeaway is that delays in KMP appointments attract steep statutory penalties.
Missing mandatory allottee particulars in PAS-3 were held to violate Rule 14(6). The company and director were penalised under Section 450 despite prior rejection of NDH-4.
The issue involved prolonged delay in filing Form MGT-14 for approval of accounts. The key takeaway is that misunderstanding compliance requirements does not absolve liability under Section 450.
The order examines prolonged delay in filing mandatory board resolutions approving accounts. It underscores that late compliance, even if rectified later, can attract maximum penalties under the residuary provision.
Failure to disclose occupation of allottees in Form PAS-3 was held to violate Rule 12(2). Rejection of a statutory form was ruled insufficient to escape penalty under section 450.
The regulator held that failure to furnish full allottee particulars violates Rule 14(6). Rejection of NDH-4 led to adjudication and penalties under section 450.
The regulator held that non-spending of CSR amounts and failure to transfer unspent funds within timelines violates section 135. Subsequent voluntary payment does not absolve past defaults.
The regulator held that failure to disclose mandatory particulars of allottees violates Rule 12(2) of the Prospectus and Allotment Rules. Even where rectification is promised, the default attracts penalty under section 450.
Explains how director funding, though permitted under company law, can create adverse tax consequences if inconsistently classified or documented.
The regulator held that failure to spend CSR funds or transfer unspent amounts within statutory timelines violates sections 135(5) and (6). Subsequent voluntary payment does not erase the default, attracting penalties under section 135(7).
