Company Law : A detailed roadmap explaining the legal framework, procedural steps, and compliance requirements for issuing CCPS through private ...
SEBI : SEBI held that post-allotment down-selling of privately placed debt securities to more than 200 investors changes their legal char...
Company Law : A summary of Non-Convertible Debentures (NCDs) as a corporate financing tool, detailing the process for private placement, regulat...
Company Law : Understand the rules of private placement under the Companies Act, 2013, including the 200-person limit, procedures, and penalties...
Company Law : Understand the distinctions and convergence of private placement (Section 42) and preferential allotment (Section 62(1)(c)) under ...
Income Tax : A bill enabling the State Bank of India (SBI) to split its shares and issue bonus shares may be placed in the current winter sessi...
Income Tax : The Taxpayer incurred interest expenditure on the funds borrowed for investing in shares of a company, with a view to acquire cont...
Company Law : The authority penalized premature utilization of funds raised through private placement in violation of Section 42(4). The ruling ...
Company Law : The case involved issuing a private placement offer before filing the required resolution. It was held that such non-compliance at...
Company Law : The authority penalized the company for using funds before allotment and filing statutory returns. It held that Section 42(4) stri...
Company Law : The ROC penalized the company for a substantial delay in filing board resolutions. It held that compliance deadlines under the Com...
Company Law : The ROC held that filing the return of allotment beyond the 15-day statutory limit violates Section 42 and imposed penalties on th...
Justo Realfintech Limited and its directors fined for failing to keep application money in a separate bank account under Section 42(6) of the Companies Act.
The company voluntarily disclosed non-compliance with private placement fund rules, but penalties were still imposed. The judgment shows that proactive disclosure does not eliminate liability under Section 42(10) of the Companies Act.
The adjudicating authority penalised a company and its directors for failing to disclose allottees’ PAN in Form PAS-3. The order enforces compliance with Rule 14(6) and Section 450 of the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC Chennai imposed penalties on Bon Fresh Foods Pvt. Ltd. and its directors for violating Section 42 of the Companies Act, 2013 by failing to disclose offeree details during private placement.
ROC Delhi penalized a company for issuing its private placement offer letter before filing the required resolution with the Registrar, violating Section 42(3) of the Companies Act. The order highlights that even inadvertent lapses in securities issuance attract penalties.
ROC Delhi imposed ₹76,500 penalty on Hexafun Private Limited and two directors u/s 42(9) for 51-day delay in filing Form PAS-3 after CCD allotment.
ROC Delhi imposes a ₹45,00,000 penalty on Game Changers Texfab Limited and two directors for multiple failures related to Private Placement rules under Section 42(10).
A summary of Non-Convertible Debentures (NCDs) as a corporate financing tool, detailing the process for private placement, regulatory compliance, and key disclosures.
An ROC Hyderabad order imposes a penalty on Chiraharit Limited and its directors for violating Section 42(6) of the Companies Act, 2013, by not opening a separate bank account for a preferential issue.
Understand the rules of private placement under the Companies Act, 2013, including the 200-person limit, procedures, and penalties for non-compliance. Learn how companies can raise capital from a select group of investors.
