The Companies Act 2013 is a crucial legislation in India governing the incorporation, functioning, and management of companies. Learn about the key provisions, compliance requirements, and legal framework under the Companies Act 2013.
CA, CS, CMA : A comprehensive guide covering 175 legal compliances for July 2026 under FEMA, Income Tax, GST, SEBI, Companies Act, Labour Laws, ...
Company Law : The Companies Act, 2013 requires most companies to hold four Board Meetings annually, while OPCs, Small Companies, and Dormant Com...
Company Law : This guide provides a complete AGM compliance tracker covering pre-AGM, AGM-day, post-AGM, and IEPF obligations under the Companie...
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 : Learn how the Companies Act, 2013 regulates managerial remuneration through profit-linked limits, approval requirements, and gover...
Company Law : MCA has cautioned stakeholders against phishing calls, WhatsApp messages, emails, fake websites, and ZIP attachments impersonating...
Company Law : ICSI has urged the Government to amend the law to allow Company Secretaries in Practice to appear before DRTs and DRATs. It argues...
Company Law : ICSI has urged the MCA to ensure eligible companies comply with Section 203 by appointing Whole-time Company Secretaries. The repr...
Corporate Law : NSO has launched the Annual Survey of Incorporated Services Sector Enterprises (ASISSE) to collect comprehensive economic and oper...
Company Law : ICSI has requested the MCA to grant compliance relaxations following technical disruptions caused by the Data Centre fire. The pro...
Company Law : Madhya Pradesh HC dismissed a winding up petition, holding that a bona fide dispute over liability required adjudication before th...
Company Law : NCLT retained the freeze on assets citing serious SFIO findings but ordered defreezing of the salary account and family members' a...
Corporate Law : The Court ruled that, without a transfer application and parallel insolvency proceedings, shifting a winding-up case to NCLT was u...
Company Law : NCLT permitted stakeholder meetings after accepting clarifications on forfeited warrants, disclosures, and scheme compliance under...
Company Law : The NCLAT held that CFO nominees must satisfy the eligibility requirements under Section 203 of the Companies Act. It set aside th...
Company Law : MCA has allowed companies to file Form DPT-3 for FY 2025-26 without additional fees until 31 July 2026 due to disruptions caused b...
Company Law : MCA notifies the New Development Bank under Section 2(11)(ii) of the Companies Act, 2013, specifying it as a body corporate for th...
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...
The Registrar of Companies held that non-filing of financial statements by the due date constituted a contravention of Section 137(1) of the Companies Act. Monetary penalties were imposed on both the company and officers in default.
The Registrar emphasized that statutory e-forms are public records relied upon by regulators and stakeholders. Filing defective or inaccurate forms can therefore attract penalties under Rule 8(3) read with Section 450.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company for incorrectly declaring itself as non-subsidiary in AOC-4 due to human error. The ruling stresses that inaccurate MCA filings can trigger penalties even when mistakes are later corrected.
ROC Kolkata penalized a company for filing an annual return containing wrong shareholder information due to clerical error. The ruling highlights that inaccurate MCA filings can trigger penalties even when later corrected.
ROC Kolkata imposed penalties after a company filed another entity’s shareholder list in its MGT-7 annual return. The order held that incorrect statutory filings attract liability even if the mistake was later admitted and rectification was sought.
The adjudication proceedings began after the Ministry of Corporate Affairs rejected the company’s NDH-4 application due to non-compliance with financial statement filing requirements. The ROC subsequently imposed penalties for delayed filing.
ROC Chennai held that delayed filing of Form MGT-14 for Board resolutions approving accounts constituted non-compliance under Section 117(1). Monetary penalties were imposed on both the company and officers in default.
ROC Chennai penalised a company and its directors for non-filing of Form MGT-7 for FY 2022-23, holding the default violated Section 92(4) of the Companies Act.
The adjudicating authority held that the company remained in continuous default for several years after becoming legally required to appoint a Company Secretary. The order emphasizes strict enforcement of corporate governance obligations relating to key managerial personnel appointments.
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.
