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...
Until MCA issues further clarification, professionals should continue issuing MGT-8 on peer-reviewed letterheads with UDIN and attach it to MGT-7/MGT-7A.
NCLAT Chennai held that appeal as prescribed under section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the order of dismissal of contempt petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, company appeals are dismissed.
The court examined a challenge to a DIR-12 filing that removed multiple directors without consent and held that the form was prima facie defective, directing fresh consideration after hearing all parties.
The ROC held that issuing offer letters and using funds before statutory filings amounts to a substantive violation of Section 42, attracting penalties under Section 42(10).
The ROC held that issuing offers and allotting shares in breach of Rule 14 amounts to substantive violations of Section 42, attracting penalties under Section 42(10).
Explains the practical meaning of “founder” and the legal threshold that turns a founder into a promoter under company and securities laws.
The authority held that the requirement of four board meetings applies per financial year, not calendar year. Even a one-time shortfall attracts penalties under Section 450.
The adjudicating authority penalised delayed transfer of unspent CSR amounts beyond the statutory timeline. The ruling underscores strict enforcement of CSR fund transfer obligations.
The adjudicating authority held that filing the declaration of commencement beyond 180 days violates Section 10A. The key takeaway is that delayed INC-20A filings attract statutory penalties regardless of intent.
The adjudicating authority penalised prolonged non-filing of Form MGT-14 despite claims of inadvertence. The key takeaway is that statutory timelines for board resolutions are mandatory, and excessive delays invite maximum penalties.
