Company Law : MCA has revised the Director KYC framework, requiring DIR-3 KYC (Web) only once every three financial years. The changes reduce co...
Company Law : Section 158 makes quoting Director Identification Number (DIN) mandatory in statutory filings. Non-compliance can lead to substant...
Company Law : The MCA has replaced annual DIR-3 KYC filings with a once-in-three-years framework. Most DIN holders who complied in FY 2025-26 ar...
Company Law : Registrar of Companies clarified that Section 155 absolutely prohibits holding more than one DIN. Penalties were imposed even thou...
Company Law : Holding more than one DIN is treated as a continuing default under law. Even genuine mistakes attract penalties, though early corr...
Company Law : The government clarified that shell companies are not defined in company law, but inactive entities are removed through statutory ...
Company Law : Applying for a Director Identification Number (DIN) is a crucial step for individuals aspiring to become directors in Indian compa...
Company Law : DINs eligible to be de-flagged on expiry of the period of disqualification are in the process of verification. Necessary action sh...
Company Law : BJP professional cell, Mumbai has requested FM that The KYC for DIN Of Director should be once in 5 years or linked to be Aadhar e...
Company Law : MCA Removed ‘present Residential Address’ of Directors, KMP and Designated Partners (DPs) Till 18.08.2020, With the he...
Goods and Services Tax : While noting the delay in filing the writ petition, the Court entertained the challenge because the assessment orders lacked a DIN...
Goods and Services Tax : The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that a GST assessment order without a DIN number is invalid and non-est. The matter was remande...
Goods and Services Tax : The High Court upheld the GST assessment order, ruling that delay in filing the writ and presence of an auto-generated reference n...
Income Tax : The court examined whether assessment orders could survive when DRP directions lacked a DIN. It held that such directions were inv...
Corporate Law : The Court examined whether a sanction lacking a DIN could sustain income-tax proceedings. It held such sanction invalid and set as...
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 Pune held that possession of more than one Director Identification Number constitutes a violation of Section 155 of the Compan...
Company Law : The ROC Kolkata held that possessing more than one Director Identification Number violates Section 155 of the Companies Act, attra...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty under Section 159 after a director was found holding two DINs simultaneously in violation of Section ...
Company Law : The ROC Mumbai penalized an individual for possessing two Director Identification Numbers contrary to Section 155 of the Companies...
MCA has revised the Director KYC framework, requiring DIR-3 KYC (Web) only once every three financial years. The changes reduce compliance while retaining DIN validation requirements.
ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty after finding that an individual held two Director Identification Numbers in violation of Section 155. The order reiterates that directors cannot apply for or retain multiple DINs, irrespective of intent.
Section 158 makes quoting Director Identification Number (DIN) mandatory in statutory filings. Non-compliance can lead to substantial penalties and continuing default consequences under Section 172.
The MCA has replaced annual DIR-3 KYC filings with a once-in-three-years framework. Most DIN holders who complied in FY 2025-26 are exempt from filing in FY 2026-27.
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.
The ROC Kolkata held that possessing more than one Director Identification Number violates Section 155 of the Companies Act, attracting penalties under Section 159. Directors must ensure that only one valid DIN is maintained at all times.
While noting the delay in filing the writ petition, the Court entertained the challenge because the assessment orders lacked a DIN. The orders were set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that a GST assessment order without a DIN number is invalid and non-est. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication by the Assessing Officer.
ROC Mumbai imposed a penalty under Section 159 after a director was found holding two DINs simultaneously in violation of Section 155 of the Companies Act. The authority noted that the duplicate DIN was generated because of a system error during portal migration but still treated it as a continuing default.
Registrar of Companies clarified that Section 155 absolutely prohibits holding more than one DIN. Penalties were imposed even though the duplicate DIN was later surrendered through DIR-5.
