Follow Us:

Company Law Penalty

Latest Articles


Penalty for Delay in Filing of Form MSME-1

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...

May 3, 2024 22119 Views 0 comment Print

Failure to file MSME Form-1 resulted in a penalty of Rs. 16,09,000/-

Company Law : Learn the consequences of not filing MSME Form 1 on time as illustrated by a recent penalty case. Understand the legal requirement...

April 26, 2024 4068 Views 0 comment Print

Conundrum over Section 42(7) (Private Placement) of Companies Act 2013

Company Law : Delve into the conundrum surrounding Section 42(7) of the Companies Act 2013 as the ROC Delhi's adjudication order highlights the ...

April 4, 2024 4464 Views 2 comments Print

India Goes Global: Decoding Leap Rules & Listing Opportunities Abroad

Company Law : Explore the game-changing Companies (Listing of Equity Shares in Permissible Jurisdictions) Rules, 2024, paving the way for Indian...

January 29, 2024 2424 Views 0 comment Print

CSR Non-Compliance: Penalty Under Section 135 – AECOM India Case

Company Law : Explore penalty order under Sec. 135 of Companies Act, 2013 on AECOM India for CSR non-compliance. Learn consequences, key takeawa...

January 16, 2024 3816 Views 0 comment Print


Latest News


MCA imposes Rs 50000 penalty on Xinpoming Technology for non-filing of DIR-3 KYC

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...

January 13, 2025 1161 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


Director Limit Violation: MCA imposes Rs. 2 Lakh Penalty

Company Law : Penalty imposed on Sh. Laxit Awla under Section 165 of Companies Act, 2013, for exceeding directorship limits. Details on violatio...

November 24, 2024 1548 Views 0 comment Print

Delhi HC Denies Interim Relief on NFRA Penalties in Reliance Capital Audit

Corporate Law : Delhi High Court refuses interim relief against NFRA penalties imposed on CAs and CA firm in the Reliance Capital audit lapses cas...

May 17, 2024 5430 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Notifications


Penalty Imposed for Delay in Holding First Board Meeting Beyond Statutory Period

Company Law : The authority imposed penalties after finding the company failed to hold its first board meeting within 30 days of incorporation. ...

April 21, 2026 48 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty Imposed for Failure to Mention DIN in Financial Statements Under Companies Act

Company Law : The issue centered on omission of DIN details by directors in financial filings. The ruling imposed penalties while exempting indi...

April 21, 2026 51 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty Imposed for Not Mentioning DIN in Financial Statements Under Companies Act

Company Law : The ROC imposed penalties for failure to disclose DIN in financial statements, violating Section 158. The key takeaway is that non...

April 21, 2026 57 Views 0 comment Print

Missing DIN in Financial Statements Attracts Penalty Under Companies Act: ROC Kanpur

Company Law : Failure to mention DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The authority imposed penalties while limit...

April 21, 2026 87 Views 0 comment Print

DIN Not Mentioned in Financial Statements Leads to ROC Penalty

Company Law : Failure to disclose DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The ROC imposed penalties while limiting l...

April 21, 2026 72 Views 0 comment Print


Penalty Imposed Due to Incorrect Shareholder Disclosure in Annual Return Filing

March 24, 2026 435 Views 0 comment Print

The authority penalized incorrect classification of shareholders in Form MGT-7A. It held that errors in statutory filings attract liability even if later corrected.

Directors Held Liable for Non-Filing of Financial Statements Under Companies Act

March 24, 2026 459 Views 0 comment Print

Repeated failure to respond to MCA notices resulted in penalties and an ex-parte order. The authority emphasized accountability for statutory filing defaults. The case serves as a cautionary example of the consequences of regulatory non-engagement.

ROC imposes ₹147500 Penalty for Failure to File Financial Statements

March 24, 2026 1005 Views 0 comment Print

The company was denied reduced penalties as it did not qualify under the definition of a small company. Full penalties were imposed for failure to file financial statements on time. The ruling clarifies the limited applicability of leniency provisions under the Companies Act.

ROC imposes Penalty for Non-Filing of Financial Statements U/s. 137(3)

March 24, 2026 168 Views 0 comment Print

The issue involved failure to file financial statements within the prescribed timeline. The ROC imposed penalties on both the company and its director. The key takeaway is strict enforcement of statutory filing requirements under the Companies Act.

ROC imposes ₹2.14 Lakh Penalty for Non-Filing of Financial Statements

March 24, 2026 156 Views 0 comment Print

Failure to file financial statements within the prescribed timeline resulted in monetary penalties. The case highlights strict enforcement of Section 137(3) compliance requirements.

Penalty Imposed Due to Failure to Maintain Registered Office Under Companies Act

March 24, 2026 216 Views 0 comment Print

The authority penalized the company for not maintaining a valid registered office address. It held that such failure constitutes a continuing statutory default attracting daily penalties.

Penalty Imposed Due to Incorrect CSR Disclosure in AOC-4 Filing

March 24, 2026 519 Views 0 comment Print

The authority penalized the managing director for wrongly declaring CSR as not applicable in financial filings. It held that signatories are responsible for accuracy, even in inadvertent errors.

ROC Rejects Force Majeure Defence in Registered Office Non-Compliance Case

March 24, 2026 264 Views 0 comment Print

Failure to maintain a functional registered office led to penalties on the company and its directors. The ruling stresses that companies must always ensure accessibility for official communications.

Penalty Imposed Due to Failure to Hold Board Meetings for FY 2022-23

March 24, 2026 513 Views 0 comment Print

The company argued that exceptional circumstances prevented compliance. The ROC rejected the plea as defaults continued even after directors were acquitted. The ruling highlights that prolonged non-compliance cannot be excused.

Penalty Imposed Due to Failure to Hold Mandatory Board Meetings U/s. 173

March 24, 2026 423 Views 0 comment Print

The company argued that exceptional circumstances prevented compliance. The ROC rejected this defense as defaults continued even after directors were acquitted. The ruling highlights that temporary hardship does not excuse prolonged non-compliance.

Search Post by Date
April 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930