Ministry of Corporate Affairs penalized Kosamattam Nidhi Limited for not mentioning DIN of directors in documents attached with e-form ADT-1
Penalties for violating Section 197 of Companies Act as company paid managerial remuneration to a director exceeding requisite approvals
Adjudicating Officer concluded that there was a violation of Section 204 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- on Secretarial Auditors.
MCA imposes penalty under section 378ZA(10) of section 378ZA(10) of Companies Act, 2013 as company failed to file proceedings of the annual general meeting, along with report of Board of Directors, audited balance sheet, and profit and loss statements.
The Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad recently imposed a penalty of INR 2,00,00,000/- (Two Crore only) on a company and its officer in default. Additionally, the company has been directed to refund all the money accepted in violation of section 42 of the Act, along with interest. The penalty was imposed because the company failed to […]
Company had issued a private placement offer letter before filing the relevant special resolution in the registry, which is a violation of Section 42(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, read with Rule 14(8) of the Companies (Prospectus and Allotment of Securities) Rules, 2014.
The IP submitted that in order to realize the maximum value for all stakeholders, the liquidator is maintaining the business of the CD on going concern basis as recommended by the CoC. He submitted that the CD was intended to be liquidated as a going concern through e auction mode as provided in IBBI (Liquidation […]
IBBI observed that Mr. Amit Gupta has charged the excess fess as the liquidator of the CD and held the prima facie view that he has inter alia violated section 35(1)(d) & (o) and 208(2)(a) & (e), regulation 4(2) of the Liquidation Regulations and regulation 7(2)(h) of IP Regulations read with clauses 1, 3 and […]
The Registrar of Companies (ROC) in Delhi has recently imposed penalties on a company, including its Independent Directors (ID) and Non-Executive Directors (NED), for violations related to the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) provisions under Section 135(5) of the Companies Act, 2013. The case involves the company’s failure to spend the required amount on CSR activities […]
KMPs who did not hold Board positions would not be liable under section 135. But all the directors as on that relevant date would be liable on account of the failure to discharge an obligation cast upon them by the law.
