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 : The authority imposed penalties after finding the company failed to hold its first board meeting within 30 days of incorporation. ...
Company Law : The issue centered on omission of DIN details by directors in financial filings. The ruling imposed penalties while exempting indi...
Company Law : The ROC imposed penalties for failure to disclose DIN in financial statements, violating Section 158. The key takeaway is that non...
Company Law : Failure to mention DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The authority imposed penalties while limit...
Company Law : Failure to disclose DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The ROC imposed penalties while limiting l...
The ROC imposed significant penalties on the company and its directors for failing to file financial statements. The ruling reinforces strict consequences for prolonged non-compliance under Section 137(3).
The ROC Delhi penalized a company director for filing e-form AOC-4 with wrong attachments, highlighting the importance of compliance with Companies Act provisions and proper documentation.
A company and its directors avoided penalties for late filing of financial statements after submitting them within thirty days of the show-cause notice, demonstrating compliance relief under Section 454(3).
A company and its directors were exempted from penalties for late filing of financial statements after rectifying the default within thirty days, highlighting the protective provision under Section 454(3).
A company and its director were penalised for failing to mention directors’ DINs in financial statements, highlighting the importance of accurate statutory disclosures under Section 158.
A company and its directors were penalised under the Companies Act for failing to hold a quarterly board meeting within the prescribed 120-day period, highlighting strict enforcement of Section 173 compliance.
MCA penalizes a company and its Managing Director for late filing of director resignation form DIR-12, emphasizing strict compliance under Section 172 of the Companies Act.
The ROC penalized the company and its directors for not filing financial statements for FY 2021-22. The order stresses that non-compliance under Section 137 attracts maximum monetary penalties.
The ROC penalised the company and directors for failing to file AOC-4 for FY 2019. Maximum statutory penalties were imposed after no response to the Show Cause Notice.
The ROC penalised the company and directors for not filing AOC-4 for FY 2017-18. With no response to notices, the maximum statutory penalty was imposed under Section 137(3).
