The appellate authority clarified that under the RTI framework, public authorities are only required to provide information already available on record and cannot be compelled to create or interpret data for applicants.
CBIC clarified that fees for amendment or cancellation of export documents may be waived when changes arise due to circumstances beyond the exporter’s control. The relaxation applies to disruptions such as cancelled vessels or logistics issues.
GSTAT issued instructions mandating submission of SCN, OIO, OIA, and appeal grounds in APL-05. It held that incomplete documentation may lead to defects unless properly justified. The ruling ensures standardized and error-free appeal filings.
ROC Patna penalised a company and its directors for failing to file the annual return within the prescribed time under Section 92 of the Companies Act, directing them to rectify the default.
The ROC Patna imposed penalties on two directors for violating Section 155 of the Companies Act by possessing more than one Director Identification Number, directing rectification and payment within 90 days.
The ROC penalized a company and its directors for failing to file the annual return for FY 2020–21. Continued non-compliance with Section 92 triggered penalties under the Companies Act.
The adjudicating authority found that the company increased paid-up share capital but failed to timely file PAS-3. Penalties were imposed under the Companies Act for violating statutory filing requirements.
The ROC penalized a company and its directors after the gap between board meetings exceeded the statutory limit of 120 days. The violation attracted penalties under Section 173(1) read with Section 450 of the Companies Act.
The ROC penalised a director for obtaining a second Director Identification Number in violation of Section 155 of the Companies Act. The order highlights that holding multiple DINs attracts penalties even if the duplication was inadvertent.
The ROC penalised a company and its officers for violating the resident director requirement under Section 149(3) of the Companies Act. The ruling highlights strict enforcement where non-compliance continued for 2297 days.
