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 : Overview of Form STK-2 under Section 248(2), covering eligibility, ineligible companies, documents, process, filing fee and ROC pr...
Company Law : Step-by-step procedure for redemption of preference shares under Section 55, including CRR, ROC filings, statutory registers and f...
Company Law : Step-by-step procedure for altering the Object Clause under Section 13, filing Form MGT-14, and SEBI LODR compliance for listed co...
Company Law : Article explains the provisions governing appointment of proxies under Section 105 of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rule 19 of the C...
Company Law : Legal Provision and Obligations for a company with respect to Securities issues by Private Placement This Article outlines the leg...
Company Law : ICSI will provide CSEET June 2026 evaluated answer books through its portal from 16 July 2026 without RTI, subject to prescribed t...
Company Law : ICSI declared the CSEET June 2026 results on 15 July 2026. The pass percentage is 67.59%, and e-Result-cum-Marks Statements are av...
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 : NCLAT set aside directions to hand over two properties to the RP, holding Civil Court-recognised possessory rights could not be di...
Company Law : NCLAT dismissed the IRP's appeal, upheld ₹3 lakh remuneration and held reliance on K. Sashidhar was distinguishable in the fee d...
Company Law : Companies and individuals prosecuted by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) under the Companies Act, 2013 were not entit...
Company Law : NCLT Mumbai sanctioned a composite scheme under Sections 230–232 and 66 after finding statutory compliance and no objections fro...
Company Law : NCLT Chennai sanctioned the amalgamation scheme after statutory compliance, undertakings on regulatory observations, and absence o...
Company Law : ROC Delhi I directed rectification of Section 92(4) non-compliance within 30 days after examining defective MCA filings relating t...
Company Law : ROC Delhi I directed rectification of Section 137(1) non-compliance within 30 days and recorded zero penalty under the proviso to ...
Company Law : ROC Delhi II imposed maximum penalties under Section 117(2) for five delayed MGT-14 filings and directed rectification within 90 d...
Company Law : ROC Gwalior imposed penalty under Section 203(5) after holding simultaneous appointment of the same person as CFO and Whole-Time D...
Company Law : ROC Gwalior imposed penalty under Section 124(7) after finding non-compliance with IEPF-2 filing requirements under Section 125(2)...
NCLAT Delhi held that balance sheet entries are reliable evidence of existence of financial debt. Accordingly, since debt and default against Corporate Debtor established, admission of application u/s. 7 of IBC justified.
NCLAT Delhi upholds order of Adjudicating Authority directing contribution to the assets of corporate debtor since it is clearly established that business of corporate debtor was carried on with intent to defraud creditors of corporate debtor.
Paid-up capital and turnover limits were enhanced to widen the small company regime. The change reduces regulatory burden and expands access to compliance relaxations.
The Registrar held that failure to disclose the risk management policy in the Board’s Report violated statutory reporting obligations. The key takeaway is that directors remain personally liable even after company strike-off.
Non-maintenance of statutory registers triggered adjudication under company law. Officers in default were held personally liable despite liquidation.
The adjudicating authority held that non-appointment of an internal auditor despite crossing the statutory turnover threshold violated company law. Directors were personally penalised, reinforcing strict compliance with audit requirements.
The adjudicating authority held directors liable for non-filing of Form MGT-8 for an earlier financial year. Liquidation of the company did not shield officers from personal penalties.
The adjudicating authority held that failure to disclose deposits accepted from related parties violated mandatory Board report norms. The key takeaway is strict enforcement of deposit disclosure requirements under company law.
Failure to give proper prominence to proxy-related rights in AGM notices led to adjudication. A monetary penalty was imposed on the director under the Companies Act.
The authority held that although the annual return was filed 266 days late, no penalty could be imposed as the default was rectified before adjudication notice. The ruling underscores relief under Section 454(3) for cured defaults.
