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 Hyderabad has penalized Virupaksha Organics and its directors for failing to appoint two independent directors as required under the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC Hyderabad has penalized Virupaksha Organics and its directors for failing to constitute a Nomination and Remuneration Committee under the Companies Act, 2013.
Shree Krishna Impex Ventures is penalized by the Gwalior Registrar of Companies for an incomplete and unsigned Board Report, violating the Companies Act.
Officers of Tamilnad Mercantile Bank, including the CFO and Company Secretary, faced penalties after board minutes were finalized 215 days late. The case clarifies officers’ accountability under Section 118(11) of the Companies Act, 2013.
MCA imposed penalties on Tamilnad Mercantile Bank and its officers for violating Section 118 of the Companies Act, 2013 by finalizing board meeting minutes 182 days late. The ruling underscores the importance of timely compliance in corporate governance.
Directors and the company were fined for continued default in maintaining a registered office, highlighting the consequences of ignoring Section 12 requirements under the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC Mumbai fines Maxwell Life Science for failing to disclose mandatory details in its Board Report, violating the Companies Act, 2013.
Officers and company directors are not liable for penalties under Section 178(8) for defaults occurring before 21 December 2020, reinforcing decriminalization provisions.
ROC Mumbai imposes penalties on Maxwell Life Science Limited and its directors for failing to include mandatory disclosures in the company’s Board Report.
ROC Mumbai fines Radiant Life Care Private Limited and its director for a 42-day delay between two board meetings, violating the Companies Act, 2013.
