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.
Company Law : The Companies Act, 2013 and related rules now require most public and private companies to issue and transfer securities only in d...
Company Law : The Companies Law Amendment Bill, 2026 proposes major reforms in corporate governance, compliance, and digital regulation. This ar...
Company Law : This guide explains the complete legal procedure for shifting a company’s registered office within the same state but under a di...
Company Law : Section 56 of Companies Act, 2013 requires execution of a proper instrument of transfer for transfer of interest of a member in a ...
Corporate Law : The article explains how digital adjudication systems, virtual hearings, and online compliance platforms are reshaping India’s c...
Company Law : Provisional list of audit firms of listed companies yet to file NFRA-2 for 2023-24. Filing deadline was 30.11.2025; fines apply fo...
Company Law : ICSI recommended restoring public access to basic company master data without mandatory login requirements. The representation sta...
Company Law : NFRA introduced guidelines to evaluate audit firms’ compliance and quality control systems. The framework emphasizes governance,...
Company Law : The issue is ambiguity in filing authority during liquidation. ICSI has requested clarity to enable liquidators to maintain statut...
Company Law : The initiative addresses inefficiencies in the current filing system and proposes consolidation and automation. It highlights a sh...
Income Tax : In a commercial suit regarding specific performance, High Court had allowed a Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the order o...
Company Law : The Madras High Court permitted Nidhi companies to submit fresh replies against NDH-4 rejection orders and directed authorities to...
Company Law : Legal Analysis and Narrative Brief: Dale and Carrington Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Another v. P.K. Prathapan and Others (Supreme Cou...
Company Law : Bombay High Court held that writ petition cannot be entertained in the face of availability of alternative remedy of approaching t...
Company Law : The case examined whether Tribunal approval was required for extending preference share redemption. It was held that such extensio...
Company Law : ROC Pune held that procedural lapses in a private placement involving one investor formed part of a single integrated transaction ...
Company Law : ROC Pune penalized a start-up company and its officers for delayed filing of e-Form MGT-14 relating to a Special Resolution under ...
Company Law : ROC Pune penalized a company and its directors for delayed filing of e-Form PAS-3 relating to private placement allotment under Se...
Company Law : ROC Pune penalized a company and its directors for utilizing private placement funds before filing return of allotment under Secti...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai-II imposed penalty under Section 450 after a company incorrectly mentioned the AGM date in Form AOC-4 XBRL. The order h...
The Registrar held that non-filing of e-Form INC-22A constitutes a violation of Rule 25A read with Section 450. Maximum penalties were imposed due to continued default and non-response to notice.
Authorities held that non-attachment of the Board’s Report to annual financial statements violates Section 134. The company and its directors were penalised due to complete non-response to statutory notices.
Failure to comply with statutory requirements for financial statements resulted in penalties under Section 134(8). Directors were held personally liable due to lack of response to the show cause notice.
ROC imposed penalty for failure to file mandatory DIR-3 KYC, leading to DIN deactivation. The order reinforces strict compliance with director KYC requirements to avoid maximum penalties.
The adjudicating authority held that non-filing of Form SH-7 violated Section 64 of the Companies Act. Penalties were imposed on the company and the officer in default despite claims of technical issues.
The authority held that undelivered statutory notices prove breach of registered office requirements. The key takeaway is that prolonged defaults can attract the maximum penalty under company law.
The adjudicating authority held that failure to disclose related party transactions violated statutory audit duties. The key takeaway is that auditors must strictly comply with AS-18 and SA-550 or face penalties under the Companies Act.
The adjudicating authority held that omission of related party disclosures violated statutory audit obligations. The key takeaway is that auditors must ensure full compliance with AS-18 and SA-550.
The authority held that non-numbering of minutes violates Secretarial Standard-1. The key takeaway is that statutory minute-keeping requirements must be strictly followed.
This analysis explains how majority control can oppress minority shareholders and how mismanagement harms companies. The key takeaway is that law intervenes only when conduct is unfair, continuous, and prejudicial.
