Company Law : The submission of MSME-1 is not only a requirement of the Companies Act, but it also has implications on the Income Tax Act and af...
Company Law : Learn the consequences of not filing MSME Form 1 on time as illustrated by a recent penalty case. Understand the legal requirement...
Company Law : Delve into the conundrum surrounding Section 42(7) of the Companies Act 2013 as the ROC Delhi's adjudication order highlights the ...
Company Law : Explore the game-changing Companies (Listing of Equity Shares in Permissible Jurisdictions) Rules, 2024, paving the way for Indian...
Company Law : Explore penalty order under Sec. 135 of Companies Act, 2013 on AECOM India for CSR non-compliance. Learn consequences, key takeawa...
Company Law : MCA imposes ₹50,000 penalty on Xinpoming Technology for non-filing of DIR-3 KYC under Rule 12A. Appeal can be filed within 60 da...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Sh. Laxit Awla under Section 165 of Companies Act, 2013, for exceeding directorship limits. Details on violatio...
Corporate Law : Delhi High Court refuses interim relief against NFRA penalties imposed on CAs and CA firm in the Reliance Capital audit lapses cas...
Company Law : Caparo Maruti penalized for failing to appoint a woman director as per Section 149(1) of the Companies Act. Penalties imposed on c...
Company Law : ROC Ahmedabad penalises Divyam Infracon and its directors Rs. 4 lakh for failure to file e-Form ACTIVE as per Section 12 of Compan...
Company Law : Summary of the appeal by Aaryak Jewellery Pvt Ltd against penalties under Sections 42, 55, and 62 of Companies Act, 2013. Decision...
Company Law : The appeal by Maptech Poly Products Pvt Ltd against a penalty for non-maintenance of its registered office was dismissed by the Re...
Company Law : Tristar Transport India Pvt. Ltd. fined for delays in filing BEN-1 and BEN-2 under Section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013. Director...
Caparo Maruti penalized for failing to appoint a woman director as per Section 149(1) of the Companies Act. Penalties imposed on company and key officers.
ROC Ahmedabad penalises Divyam Infracon and its directors Rs. 4 lakh for failure to file e-Form ACTIVE as per Section 12 of Companies Act, 2013.
Summary of the appeal by Aaryak Jewellery Pvt Ltd against penalties under Sections 42, 55, and 62 of Companies Act, 2013. Decision by MCA Regional Director.
The appeal by Maptech Poly Products Pvt Ltd against a penalty for non-maintenance of its registered office was dismissed by the Regional Director, MCA.
Tristar Transport India Pvt. Ltd. fined for delays in filing BEN-1 and BEN-2 under Section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013. Directors also face penalties.
Tristar Transport (India) Pvt. Ltd. faces penalties for delayed compliance with Section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013, as per ROC Kerala’s adjudication order.
Emperium Constructions Pvt Ltd fined Rs. 50,000 for delayed INC-20A filing. Directors penalized Rs. 19,000 each under Section 10A of Companies Act, 2013.
APS Micro Credit fined Rs. 1 lakh for violating Section 158 of the Companies Act, 2013. Director failed to mention DIN in financial statements for FY 2013-15.
The ROC, Punjab & Chandigarh, imposed penalties on Arisebhavishya India Mutual Benefit Nidhi Ltd for failing to maintain a registered office per Companies Act, 2013.
Arles Maxent Associates LLP and its designated partners fined ₹1.5 lakh by Chennai ROC for violating Section 13 of the LLP Act, 2008, due to failure to maintain a registered office.
