Company Law : The FAQ clarifies that the Companies Act, 2013 does not restrict adjournment of a duly convened and commenced AGM. An adjourned AG...
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 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 adjudicating authority held that filing AOC-4 after prolonged delay attracts penalty despite eventual compliance. Rectification beyond statutory timelines does not grant immunity.
The authority held that non-filing of the annual return for FY 2023–24 attracts penalty under section 92(5). Continued default led to penalties on both the company and directors.
The authority held that late filing of PAS-6 violates Rule 9A(8) and attracts penalty under section 450. Subsequent compliance does not erase earlier default.
Failure to file PAS-6 within time attracted penalties under section 450 despite subsequent compliance. Timely half-yearly reporting of share capital remains mandatory.
The adjudicating authority clarified that belated compliance after a show cause notice cannot nullify statutory violations. Penalties were upheld despite later rectification.
The adjudicating authority held that omission of a registered valuer’s report in PAS-3 filings attracts penalty under section 39(5). Voluntary disclosure does not eliminate statutory liability.
The authority held that inability to produce Board and AGM minutes constitutes non-compliance despite historical flood damage. Fixed penalties were upheld as mandatory under the Act.
The Registrar of Companies, Kolkata passed an adjudication order under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013, imposing penalties for violation of Rule 8(3) of the Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014 read with Section 450 of the Act. The case arose from the filing of an e-Form MGT-7A containing incorrect particulars, where the […]
Stressing that the MCA registry is a public and relied-upon record, the authority imposed penalties for inaccurate disclosures. The ruling underscores strict compliance expectations for statutory e-filings.
The authority held that filing an e-form with wrong particulars constitutes a completed contravention. Later requests to mark the form as defective do not eliminate penalty liability.
