Company Law : This FAQ examines the statutory authorities empowered to convene an Extraordinary General Meeting under the Companies Act, 2013. I...
Company Law : The 2025 amendment replaces annual DIR-3 KYC filings with a triennial compliance framework. Directors now need to file KYC once ev...
Company Law : The article explains when private companies can rely on MCA exemptions to borrow through board approval alone. It highlights the b...
Company Law : The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law...
Company Law : The scheme provides a last opportunity for defaulting companies to file pending returns and financial statements with reduced pena...
Company Law : The MCA has widened CSR eligibility by recognizing subscriptions to Zero Coupon Zero Principal Instruments as a valid CSR activity...
Company Law : The initiative addresses inefficiencies in the current filing system and proposes consolidation and automation. It highlights a sh...
Company Law : NFRA found major deficiencies in audit documentation and archival practices. The report highlights the need for stronger controls ...
Company Law : The inspection report highlights deficiencies in audit documentation, independence monitoring and compliance with auditing standar...
Company Law : The regulator found that the audit firm lacked an effective monitoring mechanism to ensure firmwide independence policies were pro...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Sh. Laxit Awla under Section 165 of Companies Act, 2013, for exceeding directorship limits. Details on violatio...
Corporate Law : That the period of lockdown ordered by the Central Government and the State Governments including the period as may be extended ei...
Company Law : The MCA has amended the valuation rules to require Registered Valuer Organisations to maintain a minimum paid-up capital of ₹25 ...
Company Law : The Registrar of Companies penalized the company and its authorized signatory after an incorrect document was attached with Form A...
Company Law : MCA amends Schedule VII of the Companies Act to include subscription to zero coupon zero principal instruments on Social Stock Exc...
Company Law : MCA has amended the CSR Rules to recognize zero coupon zero principal instruments issued by Social Stock Exchange-listed NPOs. The...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai held that repeated return of official notices proved non-maintenance of a registered office under Section 12(1) of the ...
The authority penalized the company for conducting only one Board meeting instead of the required four in a year. It held that non-compliance with Section 173(1) attracts penalty under Section 450.
Holds that failure to appoint a whole-time Company Secretary within the statutory timeline attracts penalty under section 203(5). The key takeaway is that delays, even if due to transition issues, do not excuse non-compliance.
The case addressed non-filing of financial statements under Section 137(3). The authority ruled no penalty since compliance was validly undertaken by the Resolution Professional during CIRP.
The case involved non-filing of annual return under Section 92(5). The authority held that filing through GNL-2 by the RP during CIRP constituted valid compliance, resulting in no penalty.
The MCA has released draft amendments to simplify company incorporation procedures and reduce compliance requirements. The proposal focuses on form consolidation, digital processes, and streamlined documentation.
The company failed to form mandatory board committees for over four years. The authority held that each non-compliance attracts separate penalties.
The case involved incorrect filing of director designation in statutory records. The authority held that prolonged failure to rectify the error constituted a continuing default, attracting maximum penalty.
The case involved failure to file mandatory Form MR-1 for appointment of a Whole-Time Director. The authority held that prolonged non-compliance constituted a continuing default and imposed maximum penalties under Section 450.
The company delayed appointment of independent directors despite crossing the threshold. The authority held that prolonged non-compliance attracts maximum penalty under the Companies Act.
The issue involved non-compliance with statutory requirements for maintaining board meeting minutes. The authority held that procedural lapses still attract penalties under Section 118.
