ROC Mumbai imposed penalty for possessing duplicate Director Identification Numbers in violation of Section 155. The ruling highlights that even inadvertent duplicate DIN allotment can attract continuing penalties.
ROC Delhi held that failure to regularize an Additional Director at the next AGM violated Section 161(1) of the Companies Act. Since the default continued for 2,721 days, maximum penalties were imposed on the company and directors.
The ROC found that the company failed to timely record cessation of an Additional Director whose office had automatically vacated by law. Delayed filing of DIR-12 resulted in severe penalties under Section 172.
ROC Mumbai held that even clerical mistakes in DIR-12 can attract penalty under Section 450 when incorrect information is certified in MCA filings. The ruling highlights the responsibility of authorized signatories to ensure accuracy of e-forms.
The order highlights that delayed applications, late progress reports, and non-compliance with filing requirements amounted to serious procedural lapses. IBBI emphasized strict adherence to timelines under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Under SB Order No. 03/2026, customers can now withdraw up to ₹20,000 through Aadhaar authentication without submitting withdrawal forms or vouchers. The revised framework promotes seamless and paperless Post Office Savings Bank transactions.
The Department of Posts revised the limit for voucher-free Aadhaar-authenticated withdrawals from ₹5,000 to ₹20,000. The move strengthens paperless banking and simplifies POSB transactions through e-KYC processes.
The ROC imposed penalties after a company extended its rights issue offer period following requests from promoter shareholders. The adjudication order clarified that the Companies Act restricts rights issue offers from remaining open for more than 30 days.
The issue involved alleged incomplete disclosure under RTI. The authority held that all available records were already shared and no further disclosure was required.
The case involved non-disclosure of overlapping interests between contractor and resolution applicant. The authority held that lack of transparency compromised the process and imposed a three-year suspension.
