FILING OF BEN-2 BELATEDLY WHICH IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 90 (11) OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013.- -COMPANIES (SIGNIFICANT BENEFICIAL OWNERS) RULES, 2018
VERMES MICRODISPENSING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VS ROC, BENGALURE
FACTS ABOUT THE CASE:
. The company has filed a suo-motu adjudication application on 30.12.2024 for violation of section 90(4) of the Act .
The company has filed a suo-motu adjudication application on 30.12.2024 for violation of section 90(4) of the Act wherein it was submitted that the company has received on 05.10.2023 SBO declaration in Form BEN 1 dated 26.09.2023 from Mr. Wanzhen Zhang as significate beneficial owner.
The company filed the return in e-form No. BEN 2 with Registrar of Companies, Karnataka vide SRN AB1674690 on 28.10.2024.
The Eform BEN-2 ought to have been filed by 04.11.2023 i.e. within 30 days from the aforesaid date as per Rule (4) of the Companies (Significant Beneficial Owners) Rules, 2018.
However, the company filed on 28.10.2024, with a delay of 359 days from 04.11.2023 to 27.10.2024.
ROC, BENGALURE Levied a fine of Rs 3,75,600 on company and its officers for this violation.
OTHER CASES UNDER BELATED FILING OF BEN-2
INDUS BIOTECH LTD. was fined ₹21.46 lakh by ROC, Pune, in connection with BEN-2 filing delay.
ATOMY ENTERPRISE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs ROC, New Delhi – SBO owner and company and its directors were fined by ROC.
Deer Smart India Private Limited VS ROC,Kanpur- The Company and its officers were fined for a delay of 1,158 days from 21 December 2020 to 22 February 2024, with a penalty of ₹6,54,000 under Section 90(11).
FOR THE ATTENTION OF COMPLIANCE OFFICERS
It is the duty of the compliance officers of the company to see that BEN-2 is filed within 30 days once BEN-1 is received. Otherwise, company and directors will be fined for the lapse under the Companies Act ,2013
R V SECKAR , FCS, LLB 79047 19295
No comments:
Post a Comment