Failure to mention DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The authority imposed penalties while limiting liability to responsible officers.
Failure to disclose DIN in signed financial statements was held to violate Section 158. The ROC imposed penalties while limiting liability to responsible officers only.
Failure to mention DIN in signed financial statements was treated as a violation of Section 158. The ROC imposed penalties while restricting liability to responsible officers.
Authorities held that omission of Directors’ Identification Numbers in financial statements violates statutory requirements under company law. The case highlights that even procedural lapses attract penalties regardless of intent.
Authorities held that filing financial statements without directors’ signatures violates mandatory provisions under Section 134. The ruling confirms that such procedural lapses attract penalties even if admitted by the company.
The authority penalized a company for filing financial statements without mandatory director signatures. The ruling reinforces strict compliance requirements under statutory filing provisions.
The authority penalized a company for filing unsigned financial statements, holding it in violation of statutory requirements. The ruling emphasizes strict adherence to director authentication obligations under company law.
Failure to sign financial statements led to penalties under Section 134(8). The order highlights strict compliance requirements and limited relief for small companies.
The ROC penalized the company for reporting an incorrect AGM date in its financial filing. The ruling confirms that even inadvertent errors in statutory forms attract penalties.
Authorities held that correcting a defective financial statement filing does not remove penalty liability. The ruling reinforces strict accountability for accuracy in MCA filings.
