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...
Even though the form was auto-approved under STP mode, the adjudicating authority imposed penalty for inaccurate disclosure. Responsibility for correctness rests with the digital signatory.
ROC Kolkata imposed penalties under Section 172 after a public company failed to fill a Woman Director vacancy within the prescribed three-month period, resulting in 18 days of non-compliance.
The Adjudicating Officer held that omission of a mandatory valuation report in private placement filings violates Rule 12(7) and attracts penalty under Section 450 of the Companies Act. The plea of oversight was rejected, reinforcing strict compliance in statutory e-forms.
The adjudicating authority held that failure to attach the mandatory valuation report in private placement filings violates Rule 12(7) and attracts penalty under Section 450. Oversight was not accepted as a valid defence.
The adjudicating authority held that failure to appoint the required two independent directors within the statutory timeline violates Section 149. Monetary penalties were imposed on both the company and its officers.
NCLAT Delhi held that the threshold criteria is applicable at the time of filing Section 7 application under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and not subsequently. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and order is set aside and remanded back.
ROC Kolkata imposed penalties for failure to appoint the mandatory two Independent Directors within the prescribed timeline under Section 149. The order clarifies that delayed compliance after conversion into a public company invites monetary penalty under Section 172.
The guide outlines eligibility, documentation, and ROC filing requirements for converting an LLP into a private company under the Companies Act, 2013.
In a case involving delayed filing of annual returns for FY 2013–14, the ROC declined to impose penalty under Section 454. The order clarified that pre-2018 defaults fall under the fine regime, not the penalty regime, leaving compounding as the appropriate remedy.
The Registrar held that delayed filing of financial statements for FY 2013–14 occurred before decriminalisation and falls under the fine regime. Adjudication under Section 454 was declined, with liberty to seek compounding.
