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 ...
ROC Delhi imposed penalties after a company failed to form Audit and Nomination Committees despite crossing the prescribed turnover threshold. The order held that statutory committee requirements under Sections 177 and 178 are mandatory.
ROC Kolkata imposed penalties after a company incorrectly reported that consolidated financial statements were not applicable in its AOC-4 XBRL filing. The order held that inaccurate MCA filings attract liability even if the mistake is later admitted and rectified.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company and its directors for not appointing a woman director after turnover crossed ₹300 crore. The order clarifies that operational difficulties and delays in identifying candidates cannot excuse statutory non-compliance.
ROC Uttar Pradesh imposed penalties under Section 134(8) after finding that the company’s directors failed to provide comments on statutory auditor qualifications. The company and officers were held liable for non-compliance with Section 134(3)(f) of the Companies Act.
ROC Uttar Pradesh penalised the company and officers for failing to provide comments on auditor qualifications in the Board’s Report for FY 2019-20. The order held the company in violation of Section 134(3)(f) of the Companies Act.
The Registrar of Companies found that the company remained without a whole-time Company Secretary from 2014 to 2020 in violation of mandatory legal requirements. Penalties were imposed on both the company and directors under Section 203(5).
The Registrar of Companies held that non-filing of financial statements by the due date constituted a contravention of Section 137(1) of the Companies Act. Monetary penalties were imposed on both the company and officers in default.
The Registrar emphasized that statutory e-forms are public records relied upon by regulators and stakeholders. Filing defective or inaccurate forms can therefore attract penalties under Rule 8(3) read with Section 450.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company for incorrectly declaring itself as non-subsidiary in AOC-4 due to human error. The ruling stresses that inaccurate MCA filings can trigger penalties even when mistakes are later corrected.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company for filing an annual return containing wrong shareholder information due to clerical error. The ruling highlights that inaccurate MCA filings can trigger penalties even when later corrected.
