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)...
The company and its officer were penalized for failing to transfer acquired assets into the company’s name, violating Section 187(4). Penalties were imposed for FY 2020-22.
The ROC Chennai penalized a company and its directors for failing to disclose PAN and email IDs of allottees in Form PAS-3. Reduced penalties were applied considering the company’s small status, with rectification required within 90 days.
The company failed to comply with statutory charge registration requirements under the Companies Act, 2013, attracting financial penalties on officers in default.
ROC Delhi penalised the company and officers for submitting FY 2022-23 financials without the Company Secretary’s signature, highlighting Section 134 compliance requirements and corporate governance obligations.
ROC Chennai imposed reduced penalties after a company failed to disclose PAN and email IDs of allottees in a private placement return. The order holds the lapse a Rule 14(6) violation punishable under Section 450, with relief granted under Section 446B.
ROC Chennai imposed penalties after a company failed to disclose PAN of allottees in a private placement return. The ruling confirms that omissions under Rule 14(6) attract Section 450 penalties, even for voluntary reporting.
The Court allowed the Liquidator to conduct a new sale incorporating prior judicial conditions on title verification and occupation. The auction will proceed with the revised upset price and mandatory disclosures.
The company and officers were penalized for errors in PAS-3 e-form filing during loan-to-equity conversion, highlighting the importance of accurate procedural compliance under the Companies Act.
NCLAT Delhi held that the admission of the Claim by the Resolution Professional in the first CIRP against the Corporate Debtor constituted a valid acknowledgement. Accordingly, order of adjudicating authority confirmed and appeals dismissed.
NCLAT Chennai held that suspended directors rightly directed to pay amount to liquidation estate of Corporate Debtor since evidence presented did substantiated the determination of fraudulent transaction as envisaged under Section 66 of the IBC.
