The Companies Act is a legislation that governs the formation, functioning, and management of companies. Explore the key provisions, compliance requirements, and legal framework under the Companies Act.
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...
CA, CS, CMA : A comprehensive guide covering 175 legal compliances for July 2026 under FEMA, Income Tax, GST, SEBI, Companies Act, Labour Laws, ...
Company Law : Learn how the Companies Act, 2013 regulates managerial remuneration through profit-linked limits, approval requirements, and gover...
Company Law : The article explains that SBI and PNB are statutory bodies created under separate Acts and are therefore not governed by the Compa...
Company Law : The article examines the Hamlin Trust ruling, where the NCLAT held that CFO appointments must satisfy Section 203 eligibility requ...
Company Law : ICSI has urged the MCA to ensure eligible companies comply with Section 203 by appointing Whole-time Company Secretaries. The repr...
Corporate Law : NSO has launched the Annual Survey of Incorporated Services Sector Enterprises (ASISSE) to collect comprehensive economic and oper...
Company Law : ICSI has requested the MCA to grant compliance relaxations following technical disruptions caused by the Data Centre fire. The pro...
Company Law : The MCA has widened CSR eligibility by recognizing subscriptions to Zero Coupon Zero Principal Instruments as a valid CSR activity...
Company Law : Provisional list of audit firms of listed companies yet to file NFRA-2 for 2023-24. Filing deadline was 30.11.2025; fines apply fo...
Company Law : Madhya Pradesh HC dismissed a winding up petition, holding that a bona fide dispute over liability required adjudication before th...
Company Law : The NCLAT held that CFO nominees must satisfy the eligibility requirements under Section 203 of the Companies Act. It set aside th...
Company Law : Where a composite scheme of arrangement satisfies the procedural requirements of sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 an...
Company Law : NCLT Mumbai compounded the offence for failure to hold the AGM within the time prescribed under Section 96 of the Companies Act, 2...
Company Law : The NCLT Ahmedabad refused to condone a 4,215-day delay in filing an appeal for restoration of a struck-off company. The Tribunal ...
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...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai penalized a Whole Time Director for filing Form DIR-12 with an incorrect CFO appointment date. The order reiterates tha...
ROC Patna penalised a company and its directors for failing to appoint a Chief Financial Officer after crossing the prescribed paid-up capital threshold. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 203 of the Companies Act, 2013.
The ROC used the residuary penalty provision under Section 450 to address procedural contraventions involving premature allotment and inaccurate PAS-3 disclosures. The ruling clarifies the scope of Section 450 in filling legislative gaps.
The Companies Act, 2013 and related rules now require most public and private companies to issue and transfer securities only in dematerialised form. The framework aims to improve transparency, reduce fraud, and streamline ownership records.
The ROC held that attaching an incorrect balance sheet while filing Form AOC-4 amounts to non-compliance under Section 137(1). The company and its directors were penalized for defective filing of financial statements.
ROC Patna imposed penalties after a company failed to prove that Board Meetings were held as required under Section 173(1). Absence of minutes and non-filing of MGT-7 became key reasons for the adjudication action.
ROC Patna penalised a company and its managing director after physical verification revealed that the registered office was not functioning at the recorded address. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 12 of the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC imposed penalties after a company incorrectly mentioned the financial year period while filing Form AOC-4 on the MCA portal. The ruling highlights the importance of accuracy in statutory electronic filings.
ROC Haryana penalized a company and its officers for filing e-Form MR-2 beyond the prescribed 90-day period after appointing a Managing Director. The order highlights strict compliance requirements under Section 196 and Rule 7(3) of the Companies Act framework.
ROC Uttar Pradesh penalized a company and its directors for failing to file the annual return for FY 2019-20 under Section 92(4). The ruling highlights strict consequences for non-filing of statutory annual returns under the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC Uttar Pradesh dropped penalty proceedings after confirming that Form MGT-14 had already been filed for approval of accounts. The ruling highlights that penalties under Section 117(2) cannot survive once compliance is verified.
