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...
The ROC imposed penalties for non-registration of a secured loan charge despite disclosure in financial statements. The key takeaway is that charge registration is mandatory, irrespective of loan size or later repayment.
The ROC imposed penalties after official communications were returned undelivered. The key takeaway is that a functional registered office is a mandatory statutory requirement.
The ROC penalised a company for commencing operations without a valid declaration of commencement. The key takeaway is that business cannot begin before complying with Section 10A requirements.
Non-filing of annual returns led to maximum penalties on the company and directors. The key takeaway is that Section 92 compliance is mandatory and strictly enforced.
Failure to report resignation and appointment of directors led to penalties under company law. The key takeaway is that Board Reports must fully disclose changes in management.
Directors were penalised for failing to provide mandatory disclosures in EOGM notices. The key takeaway is that full explanatory statements are essential for valid shareholder approval.
The order holds that utilisation of private placement money before allotment and filing of returns violates Section 42, attracting substantial penalties despite financial hardship claims.
The adjudicating authority held that delay in filing return of allotment attracts penalty under Section 42, but relief under Section 446B applies where the entity qualifies as a small company.
Unsigned financial statements uploaded with statutory filings were held non-compliant. Liability was fixed on the certifying director under the Companies Act.
The ROC held that depositing interim dividend in a current account instead of a separate account violates section 123(4). Monetary penalties were imposed despite subsequent compliance.
