All companies to file a one-time return of all outstanding receipts of money or loans from April 1, 2014, to March 31st, 2019

by | posted in: Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0

With a spate of corporate irregularities coming to the fore, the Centre has decided to make disclosure norms more stringent. Corporate India is now required to submit details of transactions involving the receipt of money or loans taken by them, which are otherwise not considered deposits.

Every company other than Government company to which these rules apply, shall on or before the 29th day of June, of every year, file with the Registrar, a return in Form DPT–3 along with the fee as provided in Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014 and furnish the information contained therein as on the 31st day of March of that year duly audited by the auditor of the company.

Form DPT–3 shall be used for filing return of deposit or particulars of transaction not considered as a deposit or both by every company other than Government company.

  1. Due Date of the Form DPT-3 – Return of Deposits: Every company shall on or before the 30th day of June, of every year, file a return of deposit with the Registrar and furnish the information contained therein as on the 31st day of March of that year duly audited by the auditor of the company.
  2. Due Date of the Form DPT-3 (ONE TIME): Form DPT-3 one time Due Date – all companies would be required to file Form DPT-3 one-time on or before the 29th June 2019
  3. DPT-3 Due Date (EVERY YEAR): Form DPT-3 every year on or before 30th June of the preceding year.

Auditor of Company prepare the financial statements which include the following (Audited Copy)

  • Balance sheet,
  • Profit and loss account
  • Income and expenditure account
  • Cash flow statement
  • Statement of changes in equity

Due Date: 29th May 2019

Penalty On the defaulting company
A fine of minimum Rs. 1 crore or twice the amount of deposit so accepted, whichever is lower, which may extend to Rs.10 crores; and

Every Officer who is in default: Imprisonment up to seven years and with a fine of not less than Rs. 25 lakh which may extend to Rs. 2 crores.

Income tax department eyes over Rs 100 bn from ‘struck off’ firms

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0

The income-tax (I-T) department is estimating tax recovery of over Rs 100 billion from companies that have been struck off from records of the Registrar of Companies (RoC) last year.

The tax department is in the process of filing a petition before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for restoration of registration in as many as 50,000 such companies.

The RoCs had struck off 300,000 companies after it was found they had not filed their statutory returns. Directors of these companies have been prohibited from holding directorships in any other company.
The move follows Central Board of Direct Taxes’ (CBDT) directive to identify, process and file petition to restore these companies by August 31. The board also asked the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) not to oppose the restoration application in the tribunal, as such a move would refrain them from launching tax recovery proceedings against these firms.
“Several of these companies are restricted to operate their bank accounts and movable and immovable properties until they are restored. The restoration will compel these firms to make relevant disclosures of credentials under Companies Act, and then accordingly tax proceeding will be initiated for tax recovery,” said an I-T official.

Tax industry experts, too, believe that restoration is essential to recover taxes due from these firms.

“The tax department is contesting the strike off of so-called companies as in several cases there would be pending tax demands that cannot be recovered if the company is not active. Also, even in cases where genuine companies have been struck off, with the best intentions, the companies would not be able to pay the tax dues as all their assets including bank accounts would be non-operational,” said Amit Maheshwari, partner at Ashok Maheshwary & Associates LLP.

The I-T department is of the view that these companies abused their corporate structure by creating multi-layering during  demonetisation for cash deposits. I-T probe also reveals that many individuals have used these firms for siphoning money or converting undisclosed cash to legitimate money post the note ban.

Official data say that 35,000 companies deposited and withdrew cash worth over Rs 170 billion after the note ban, through about 60,000 bank accounts.

It was noticed that the accounts that had negligible balance on November 8, 2016, have seen significant cash deposits and withdrawal during this period.

According to people with knowledge of the matter, along with restoration, the I-T department will also start issuing notices to these firms under Section 179 of the I-T Act, which makes the company’s directors/promoters liable to pay dues on behalf of the firm, without adjudication by the court.

Further, tax recovery officers have been asked to conduct survey operations on select firms where the tax demand is high. In cases where assets or bank accounts are lying abroad, the department will seek the foreign tax authority’s assistance to recover tax claims with the provisions in the relevant treaty, said another senior official.

Sources said that in a meeting of a task force on shell companies set up by the Prime Minister’s Office, on November 30 last year, the director general of corporate affairs (DGCoA) had suggested that the tax department approach RoCs for taking up the matter of reviving these companies. It was also suggested that revenue considerations should weigh in favour of restoring them.

Apart from these companies, another set of above 200,000 firms have been sent notices and action will soon be taken against them. However, the tax department wants MCA to keep them posted before striking off any company, since there could be tax dues.

 Taxing Affair
  • I-T pursuing restoration of 50,000 struck-off companies
  • RoCs had struck off 300,000 companies, prohibited their directors from holding directorship in other firms
  • Tax industry experts believe that restoration is essential for recovery of taxes from these firms
  • Restoration will allow companies to operate bank account, assets
  • After restoration, I-T to issue notices under Section 179 of I-T Act
  • Directors/promoters would be liable to pay tax dues
  • These firms abused corporate structure to facilitate significant cash transactions post note ban

Source: Business Standard

MCA sees Rs 2.8 lakh cr recovery from IBC-led resolution process

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
Section 12 (A) of IBC allows for a withdrawal of an insolvency application if 90% of the creditors’ committee (CoC) by voting share approving it.

Terming the current insolvency process and its outcomes as ‘super success, Ministry of Corporate Affairs sees total recovery amount touching Rs 2.8 lakh crore through resolutions with the settlement of two key accounts, including some others — Essar Steel, where financial creditors have approved the resolution and Bhushan SteelNSE 5.27 % and Power.

“The 100 cases that have been settled through resolution accounts, Rs 1.8 lakh crore have been netted which is not a small amount and the accounts sitting on margin (Bhushan Steel and Power & Essar Steel), another Rs 1 lakh crore along with some other mid-sized resolutions can come, so Rs 2.8 lakh crore out of Rs 10 lakh crore of NPA that time is not a small amount, IBC is a super success”, says MCA senior officials on the insolvency processes

In case of Essar Steel, the CoC has approved the resolution process but the process got stuck after operational creditor Standard Chartered moved NCLAT for higher share from the funds. The debt-ridden steel firm had Rs 42,000 crore coming from the resolution plan of global steel major ArcelorMittal.

JSW Steel had revised its offer for Bhushan Power & Steel from Rs 11,000 crore to Rs18,000 crore and later to over Rs 19,000 crore which the CoC had approved.

And it is not just resolution process-led recoveries, the official said pre-resolution processes have also yielded results in 6,500 cases netting Rs 3 lakh crore on dead assets.

“6500 cases settled involving claims of close to Rs 3 lakh crore where they have been have settled before admission. And now after 12 (A) has been introduced, another 100 cases which are at stages of 90% CoC approval are moving towards out of court settlements. Both (in and outside resolutions and NCLT) are happening. About 500 cases have got settled through the court process and 6,500 cases settled even before admission”, said the officials.

Section 12 (A) of IBC allows for a withdrawal of an insolvency application if 90% of the creditors’ committee (CoC) by voting share approving it.

MCA officials dismissed the notion of high haircuts through resolution process. They said: “It (IBC) is super success. There should not be any brouhaha over haircuts. Will anybody pay more than what is the value? Suppose an asset is used for 20 years, there is nothing more to it, there is a Rs 50,000 crore loan, liquidation value is Rs 1,000 crore, so you get (the creditors) Rs 1,000 crore only.”

“Wherever a resolution has taken place, creditors are getting 200% of the liquidation value. So definitely value maximisation is the context, demand and supply will fix the value”, the officials said.

Source: Economic Times

MCA brings more clarity on guidelines for reserving the name of the Company

by | posted in: Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0

The MCA has amended the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014. In the revised Rule 8 for reservation of name of a company, the Ministry has elaborated the provision by inserting various illustrations. The Rule has been divided in to 2 parts – Rule 8A and Rule 8B. Rule 8A deals with the undesirable names and Rule 8B limits use of words such as Board, commission, National, Republic etc. only after obtaining previous approval of Government.

MCA has created a dedicated unit Central Registration Centre (CRC) to expedite the incorporation related activities including Name approval. Yet the stakeholders were facing difficulty in getting the name approved due to lack clarity in the Rules for selection of desired name. This amendment may bring relief to the stakeholders while choosing the name of a company. Revised Rules with detailed illustration will serve as ready-made guidance for both practicing professionals and CRC thereby further easing the incorporation process.

The MCA has amended the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014. In the revised Rule 8 for reservation of name of a company, the Ministry has elaborated the provision by inserting various illustrations. The Rule has been divided in to 2 parts – Rule 8A and Rule 8B.

Rule 8A deals with the undesirable names and Rule 8B limits use of words such as Board, commission, National, Republic etc. only after obtaining previous approval of Central Government.

While considering the application related to name approval the following illustrations must be considered otherwise the names shall be considered as undesirable and will not be approved. Some of the illustrations have been discussed hereunder:

1. Name should not be identical to singular or plural form of existing company:

User of plural or singular form of the words will be considered as undesirable and such name wouldn’t be approved by authority on receipt of application for reservation of name of company. This can be better understood with the help of illustration as provided by MCA:

– For e.g. Green Technology Limited shall be considered same as Greens Technology Limited and Greens Technologies Limited.

2. Change in Tense would be considered as Similar Name:

The department will reject the application for reservation of name of the company if someone use different tense in name of the company such as:

– Ascend Solution ltd. is same as Ascended Solutions Ltd and Ascending Solutions Ltd.

3. Different use of phonetic spellings is treated as identical name:

Chemtech Ltd is same as Chemtec Ltd, Chemtek Ltd, Cemtek ltd, Kemtech Ltd and Kemteck Ltd.

4. Change in order of words of name and use of article before proposed name:

The application for reservation of name will not be considered if an applicant just changes the order of words or use of article before any name of the existing company for e.g.:

1. Ravi Builders and Contractors Ltd is same as Ravi Contractors and Builders Ltd

2. Congenial Tours Ltd is same as A Congenial Tours Ltd. and The Congenial Tours Ltd.

5. Variation in spelling of two name:

Name including slightly variation in spelling of existing company name would be considered as resembling name and department will reject the application for reserving a name of the company. For example,

– Color Technologies Ltd is similar as Colour Technologies Ltd.

6. Addition, deletion or modification of exiting name:

Addition, deletion or modification in any existing name of the company is not allowed and the concerned department will spare no time to reject the proposed name of the company. To instance,

1. Salvage Technologies Ltd is an existing name and it is same as Salvage Technologies Delhi Ltd. and Salvage Delhi Technologies Ltd.

2. Thunder Services Ltd is same as Thunder11 Services Ltd. and OneThunder Services Ltd.

7. Change in meaning either in Hindi or English:

Complete translation or transliteration or nay part of an existing name either in Hindi or English. For Example:

– National Electricity Corporation Ltd is same as Rashtriya Vidyut Nigam Ltd

8. Use of host name such as ‘www’ or a domain extension such as ‘net’, ‘org’, ‘dot’ or ‘com’ in one or both name: For Example

(i) Ultra Solutions Ltd. is same as Ultrasolutions.com Ltd.

(ii) Supreme Ultra Solutions Ltd. is not the same as Ultrasolutions.com Ltd.

9. Word or expression which can be used only after obtaining previous approval of Central Government are given below:

(a) Board;

(b) Commission;

(c) Authority;

(d) Undertaking;

(e) National;

(f) Union;

(g) Central;

(h) Federal;

(i) Republic;

(j) President;

(k) Rashtrapati;

(l) Small Scale Industries;

(m) Khadi and Village Industries Corporation;

(n) Financial Corporation and the like;

(o) Municipal;

(p) Panchayat;

(q) Development Authority;

(r) Prime Minister or Chief Minister;

(s) Minister;

(t) Nation;

(u) Forest corporation;

(v) Development Scheme;

(w) Statute or Statutory;

(x) Court or Judiciary;

(y) Governor;

(z) the use of word Scheme with the name of Government (s), State, India, Bharat or any Government authority or in any manner resembling with the schemes launched by Central, State or local Governments and authorities; and

(za) Bureau

 

Government releases compliance schedule to ensure MSME payments

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
With a spate of corporate irregularities coming to the fore, the Centre has decided to make disclosure norms more stringent. Specified Companies (Furnishing of information about the payment to micro and small enterprise suppliers)
Every specified company shall file in MSME Form I details of all outstanding dues to Micro or small enterprises suppliers (whose payment is due or not paid within 46 days) dealing with MSME shall mandatorily file a return with MCA in e-form MSME-1.

Directors of companies delaying payments for supplies made by small businesses will face imprisonment up to six months or pay fines between Rs 25,000 and Rs 3,00,000.

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has notified new guidelines to address the concerns of small businesses over delayed payments that not only makes it mandatory for all companies to file half yearly returns detailing outstanding dues to MSME suppliers but also assign reasons if such delays are for more than 45 days.

The new rules have been implemented to put pressure on companies to pay up.

Under the proposed changes, every private and public company will mandatorily file “MSME FORM I” with the the Registrar of Companies (RoC) by February 22 with details of all outstanding dues to MSME suppliers existing on the date of notification of rules on January 22.

In addition, all entities will also have to file a return as per MSME Form I by October 31 for the period from April to September and by April 30 for the period from October to March.

If there are any delays in payments, it has to be mentioned in the returns with the MCA reserving the right to penalise defaulting entities.

In order to ensure adherence to the new rules, MCA has also proposed a fine of up to Rs 25,000 on companies defaulting in filing the information or delaying payments.

The fines for directors, chief financial officer and company secretary of a defaulting company has been specified at not less than Rs 25,000 up to Rs 3,00,000 per person with provision also for imprisonment up to six months.

The new rules will be applicable for every company that received goods or services ‘from’ MSME segment for which payment is due for 45 days or more.

The companies that have no outstanding payments to MSMEs or such outstanding payments are not for more than 45 days are not required to file details in the specified form.

For the purpose of new rules, MSMEs are defined on the basis of capital investment made in plant and machinery, excluding investments in land and building.

Manufacturing units having investment below Rs 25 lakh were termed Micro, those between Rs 25 lakh and Rs 5 crore termed as Small and from Rs 5 crore to Rs 10 crore as Medium.

Similarly, for Service units, corresponding investment thresholds were upto Rs 10 lakh Micro, between Rs 10 lakh to Rs 2 crore Small and between Rs 2 crore to Rs 5 crore Medium.

Source: Business Standard

CBDT to share data with GST department to trap tax evaders

by | posted in: Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs, Income Tax,e-Filing- Individuals, Firms, Companies | 0
Highlights
• This move will apply for all those assessees who have business income and file the returns specified for those with this income i.e. ITR 3 to ITR -7.
• Before sharing any information, the income tax authority shall determine that such information is necessary for the GSTN authority to perform its functions.

The government on Tuesday authorized the income tax department to share details including sales and profits that businesses have reported in their income tax returns with GSTN, the company that processes Goods and Services Tax (GST) returns, to scale up scrutiny and check tax evasion.

The move will allow direct and indirect tax authorities to zero in on discrepancies in the information that business have disclosed in their respective tax return forms and nail tax evaders. The move comes as part of tightening of anti-evasion measures after the GST Council gave several relaxations in recent months to ease the rigors of tax compliance to businesses, especially to small ones. A formal system of data sharing between direct and indirect tax authorities means businesses have to be extra careful while filling up their tax returns and avoid mismatches. The move is significant considering that businesses did not show enthusiasm in opting for a single window tax facility for corporate tax, service tax and central excise in 2006 under the name Large Taxpayer Unit as they apparently preferred to avoid simultaneous scrutiny by different tax authorities.

An office order issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on Tuesday authorized the Principal Director General of Income Tax (systems) or Director General of Income Tax (systems) to share specified data with an officer of GSTN. The designated officers from both sides will also decide ways of simultaneous exchange of information

==============================================================================

Order.  F. No. 225/105/2019/ITA.ll              Order Under Section 138(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

F. No. 225/105/2019/ITA.ll
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes

New Delhi, the 30th  April, 2019

Order In exercise of powers conferred under section 138(1)(a) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’), for purposes of sub-clause (i) of section 138(1)(a) of the Act, the Central Board of Direct taxes (‘CBDT’) hereby directs that Principal Director General of Income-tax (Systems) or Director General of Income-tax (Systems), New Delhi shall be the specified income-tax authority for furnishing information respecting assessees to the Nodal Officer, Goods and Services Tax Network (‘GSTN’).

2.  The data/information to be furnished by the specified income-tax authority shall be: (a)  Request based exchange of data, wherein, important financial fields which are captured in the Income Tax Returns (ITRs) such as (i) status of filing of ITR; (ii) turnover; (iii) gross total income, (iv)turnover ratio; (v) GTI range; (vi) turnover range and (vii) any other field, the modalities of which shall be decided by the concerned specified authorities. (b)  Spontaneous exchange of data, the modalities of which shall be decided by the concerned specified authorities. (c)  Automatic exchange of data, the modalities of which shall be decided by the concerned specified authorities.

While furnishing the information, the specified income-tax authority shall form an opinion that sharing of such information is necessary for the purposes of enabling the specified authority in GSTN to perform its functions under the Goods and Services Tax.
3.  To facilitate the process of furnishing information, Principal Director General of Income-tax (Systems) or Director General of Income-tax (Systems) would enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (‘MoU’) with nodal officer, GSTN, which inter-alia would include modalities of exchange of data, maintenance of confidentiality, mechanism for safe preservation of data, weeding out after usage etc. The time line for furnishing information shall also be decided by Pr. Director General of Income-tax (Systems) or Director General of Income-tax (Systems) in consultation with concerned nodal officer and included in the said MoU.
4.  A copy of MoU shall be forwarded to this division for record purposes.
5.  This issues with the approval of Chairman, CBDT.
(Rajarajeswari R.) Under Secretary,
(ITA-Il), CBDT

DIR-3-DIN eKYC annual filing deadline extended to 30th June of next financial year

by | posted in: Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
MCA extends due date of DIR -3 / E-KYC of Directors

 

 

MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, 30th April, 2019

 

MCA has notified that the Deadline for Annual Filing of Form DIR 3 ((KYC of Directors) has been Extended from 30 April to 30 June, of the immediately next financial year, i.e. the due date for filing of DIR 3 (KYC of Directors) for Financial Year 2018-19 has been extended from 30 April 2019 to 30 June 2019.

G.S.R.-(E).- In exercise of the powers conferred by the second proviso to sub-section (1), sub-section (4), clause (f) of sub-section (6) of section 149, sub-sections (3) and (a) of section 150, section 151, sub-section (5) of section 152, section 153, section 154, section 157, section 160, sub-section (1) of section 158 and section 170 read with section 469 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014, namely: –

1. (1) These rules may be called the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Amendment Rules, 2019.

(2) ‘They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014, in rule 12A, for the words and figures “on or before 30th, April of immediate next financial year”, the words and figures “on or before 30th June of immediate next financial year” shall be substituted.

[F. N o. 1/22/2013-CL-V]

(K.V.R. Murty)
Joint Secretary to the Government of India

Note: – The principal notification was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, section 3, sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 259(E) dated the 31st March, 2014 and subsequently amended vide the following notifications:-

Read the MCA – Notification here