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 : ROC Mumbai penalized a director after Form AOC-4 contained an incorrect AGM due date. The order emphasizes that directors are resp...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty after finding that an individual held two Director Identification Numbers in violation of Section 155...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai penalized a Whole Time Director for filing Form DIR-12 with an incorrect CFO appointment date. The order reiterates tha...
Company Law : The adjudicating authority held that an unlisted public company violated Section 29 by continuing to issue and transfer shares in ...
Company Law : The order emphasizes that delayed filing may regularize compliance but does not extinguish the offence committed during the period...
ROC Delhi penalised a company and its officers for three separate compliance failures linked to a private placement of shares. The order highlights that errors in disclosures, e-forms, and attachments can attract penalties under Section 450.
ROC Kolkata held that mentioning an incorrect AGM due date in Form AOC-4 constituted a violation of Rule 8(3). The company and certifying director were penalised despite admitting the mistake as inadvertent.
ROC Pune held that possession of more than one Director Identification Number constitutes a violation of Section 155 of the Companies Act. Despite the absence of mala fide intent, penalty under Section 159 was imposed for the default.
ROC Kolkata held that incorrect disclosure of AGM and AGM due dates in Form AOC-4 constituted a violation of Rule 8(3). The company and certifying director were penalised despite describing the error as a clerical mistake.
ROC Delhi held that delay in issuing share certificates to subscribers violated Section 56(4)(a) of the Companies Act. The company and its officers were penalised despite subsequently rectifying the default.
ROC held that circulating the private placement offer letter before filing Form MGT-14 violated Section 42(3) and Rule 14(8). The case underscores the importance of completing prerequisite filings before initiating private placement offers.
ROC Cuttack held that responsibility for inaccurate information in e-forms rests with the authorised signatory and certifying professional under Rule 8(3). The company itself escaped penalty in the circumstances of the case.
ROC Bangalore found a violation of Section 12 after a statutory notice could not be served at the companys registered office. The company and its directors admitted the default and accepted the penalties.
Penalties were imposed not only on the company but also on its officers in default for delayed filing of the return of allotment. The ruling emphasizes directors’ responsibility in ensuring adherence to corporate compliance requirements.
ROC Bangalore held that converting loans into equity without obtaining prior approval under Section 62(3) violates the Companies Act. Such transactions must comply with the appropriate share issuance provisions.
