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...
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 : RGPL Commodities Pvt Ltd faces penalties under Section 89(6) of the Companies Act, 2013 for delayed filing of e-Form MGT-6. Total ...
Company Law : GM Elektra Pvt Ltd fined ₹1,88,500 by ROC Mumbai for delayed filing of BEN-2 under Section 90 of the Companies Act, 2013. Direct...
Company Law : Registrar of Companies penalizes Paramount Dye Tec Limited for not disclosing trading activity in its MOA, violating Section 4(1)(...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Singodwala Warehousing for non-compliance with Section 62(3) of Companies Act. Fine details and appeal process ...
Company Law : MBL Infrastructure Ltd. faces scrutiny under Section 90 of the Companies Act for non-compliance. Details on adjudicating officer's...
Registrar of Companies in Rajasthan imposes a 5 Lakh penalty on Axtron Texchem (India) Private Limited and its directors for delaying filing of Form DIR-12 related to director resignations.
Discover why no penalty was imposed for failure to file Form DIN-3 in Rajasthan. Get insights into Companies Act, 2013 violation case, and registrar’s decision
The breach relates to the absence of signatures from any directors on the company’s Balance Sheet for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021. Following a hearing, penalties were levied: the company was fined Rs. 3,00,000, while each director, Mr. Veerendra Kumar Vishwakarma and Ms. Neelam Gautam, faced fines of Rs. 50,000 each.
Explore implications of violating Section 12(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Delve into an order under section 454 and penalties imposed for non-compliance.
Learn about the penalty imposed on LOIN TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED under Section 134(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, by the Registrar of Companies, Madhya Pradesh.
Registrar of Companies in Rajasthan fines M/s EMBASSY INFRATECH INDIA LIMITED and its directors a total of 9 lakh rupees for failing to conduct minimum required four board meetings annually, violating Section 173 of Companies Act, 2013
Registrar of Companies in Rajasthan fines M/s EMBASSY INFRATECH INDIA LIMITED and its directors for violating Section 119 of Companies Act, 2013 by not maintaining meeting records due to non-existence of registered office
Violation of Section 135(5) occurs when a company fails to comply with this requirement by not spending the prescribed amount on CSR activities within the stipulated time frame.
This document is a notice issued by the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, under the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, India. The notice pertains to the adjudication of a penalty against Starnet Real Estate Development Limited (formerly known as Starnet Software (India) Limited) for violation of Section 117 of the Companies Act, 2013. […]
The order states that the members of the company had passed a special resolution to alter the main objects clause of the Memorandum of Association at an Extraordinary General Meeting held on January 30, 2021. As per Section 117 of the Companies Act, 2013, the resolution was required to be filed within 30 days. However, the company filed the required form, MGT-14, with a delay of 261 days.
