Government to set up new agency to probe corporate accounting frauds

The government will soon set up a specialised agency to investigate large corporate accounting frauds. It is keen to establish a robust mechanism for faster inquiries into scams such as the one at Satyam Computer Services, which overstated earnings for several years under a previous management.

The proposed agency is likely to examine accounting frauds of certain classes of listed companies or those of Rs 500 crore and more.

To be formed under the Companies Act provisions, the agency will be mandated to investigate auditing and accounting frauds, either suo motu or on referral by the Centre.

 

“The threshold for accounting frauds to be probed by the upcoming agency is likely to be Rs 500 crore and above. It could also probe frauds of certain classes of listed companies,” said a senior government official. “Currently, there’s a lack of specialisation required to probe complex accounting frauds. The agency will ensure swifter probes.”
First suggested in the aftermath of the Satyam fraud, in which the auditor was also implicated, the upcoming agency will have an overarching role to regulate chartered accountants as well as set standards. It will have forensic auditors on its panel as well.

At present, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has authority to investigate and take disciplinary action in cases in which an auditor is involved. Any fraud below the threshold set by the government could still be investigated by the professional association.

ICAI has requested the corporate affairs ministry to not dilute its authority. If the government is keen on setting up an authority, ICAI has suggested that this look at high-value accounting scams above a threshold of Rs 1,000 crore.
“We have made a representation to the government that ICAI’s mandate should not be diluted and authority to initiate probe and take disciplinary action against auditors should rest with the institute,” ICAI president Manoj Fadnis told ET.

In recent years, ICAI has probed auditors of companies such as Reebok, Sesa Goa, Satyam and the Saradha Group among others. These inquiries followed references sent by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO).
“The agency will strengthen the government’s mechanism and will ensure faster enquires into accounting frauds. For the auditing profession as well, it will be a very positive step as the agency will oversee quality of profession,” said Lalit Kumar, partner at J Sagar Associates. “But the government also has to ensure that ICAI’s mandate is not diluted.”

A recent study by Assocham and Grant Thornton India said there was a 45 per cent increase in Indian corporate fraud in the past two years. The proposed agency will have powers to penalise audit firms in case they are found guilty of misconduct. Penalty could also include the disbarment of such audit firms.

The agency will also be solely in charge of setting up and revising accounting standards and will have professionals from industry and several government bodies on its panel. “The agency will make recommendations on formulation and laying down of accounting and auditing standards for companies,” a senior government official told ET. “It will also monitor and enforce compliance and oversee quality of service of professionals in the industry.”

ET VIEW

No Duplication Please, Overhaul SFIO

Duplication makes no sense. India already has a specialised agency, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) to do cutting-edge investigation on financial frauds. The Institute of Chartered Accounts of India, on its part, can take disciplinary action against errant auditors. True, the SFIO’s functioning has been dismal so far, and what is needed is to transform the agency to take on new and complex probes. It should hire professionals laterally including cyber security experts, forensic auditors and tap the best talent from other investigating agencies. Ideally, it should draw together a team depending on the case. But to attract the best talent, it also needs to pay market-linked salaries.

Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/49927368.cms

Ease of doing business in India – Related Party Transactions

Related party Transactions.

As part of its ongoing efforts to improve ease of doing business in the country, the Corporate Affairs Ministry has notified changes that further relax compliance requirements.

As another major step, the Companies Amendment Act, 2015 addresses “problems faced by large stakeholders who are related parties”.

In this new amendment, it replaces “special resolution with ordinary resolution for approval of related party transactions [Section 188] by non-related shareholders”.

Besides, related party transactions between holding companies and wholly owned subsidiaries have been exempted from the requirement of approval of non-related shareholders.

As per the amendment, the requirement of passing special resolution for approving certain related party transactions has been done away with. With this, certain related party transactions can now be approved through ‘ordinary resolution’ instead of ‘special resolution’.

Further, it has also been provided that for related party transactions between a holding company and its wholly owned subsidiary, no resolutions are required to be passed if the accounts of the holding and subsidiary company are consolidated and placed before the shareholders in a general meeting for approval.

Punishment for Contravention on defaults relating to deposits

Punishment for Contravention of Section 73 and Section 76 of Companies Act, 2013 for Acceptance of Deposits by Companies [New Section 76A inserted]

 

The Companies (Amendment) Act, 2015 has inserted a new Section 76A after Section 76 which introduces penal provisions for contravention of provisions of Section 73 and Section 76 (pertaining to acceptance of deposits by a company) or rules made thereunder, or if a company fails to repay deposits within the time specified.

As per the amended law:
A company, if it fails to repay deposits within the specified time, shall be punishable with a fine which shall not be less than Rs.1 crore but which may extend to Rs. 10 crores, in addition to the payment of the amount of deposit or part thereof and the interest due.
Every officer of the company who is in default shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years or with a fine which shall not be less than Rs. 25 lakhs but which may extend to Rs. 2 crore, or with both.
Thus, specific punishment is prescribed for non-compliance to norms governing deposits taking activities.

Additional Fees for delay in e-filing under Companies Act, 2013

MCA had changed the structure of Additional Fees to be levied for delay in filing E Forms over the companies while filing their Balance Sheet and Annual Returns with concerned Registrar of Companies through MCA Portal. Such change of Additional Fee Structure encouraged the Corporate to file their returns as early as possible so that they can avoid the heavy additional fees. That has resulted in increase the percentage of filing within the due time.

Pursuant to rule 12 of the Companies (Registration of Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014, following table of additional fees shall be applicable for delays in filing of the forms other than for increases in Nominal Share Capital

Sl  No. Period of delay  Additional fees for the period of delay
01 Up to 15 days (sections 93,139 & 157)         One time
02 More than 15 days and up to 30 days (Sections 93, 139 & 157) and up to 30 days in remaining forms.         2 times of normal filing fees

 

03 More than 30 days and up to 60 days         4 times of normal filing fees
04 More than 60 days and up to 90 days         6 times of normal filing fees
05 More than 90 days and up to 180 days         10 times of normal filing fees
06 More than 180 days and up to 270 days         12 times of normal filing fees

 

Further Note:

1) The additional fee shall also applicable to revised financial statement or board’s report under sections 130 and 131 of the Act and secretarial audit report filed by the company secretary in practice under section 204 of the Act.

(2) The belated filing of documents /forms (including increasing in nominal capital and delay caused thereon) which were due to be filed whether in Companies Act, 1956 Act or the Companies Act, 2013 Act i.e due for filing prior to notification of these fee rules, the fee applicable at the time of actual filing shall be applicable.

(3) Delay beyond 270 days, the second proviso to sub-section (1) of section 403 of  the Act may be referred.

MCA asks companies to submit annual filings on time

To ensure that there is no last-minute congestion on its e-filing portal, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) has asked companies to submit their financial statements and annual returns at the earliest.

The Ministry’s message assumes significance as this would also be the first year that corporates would be making their filings under provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 — which came into effect from April 1, 2014.

“To avoid last minute rush and system congestion on the MCA 21 portal on account of annual filings during month of October/November 2015, companies are requested to file their financial statements and annual returns at the earliest without postponing it to the last few days permitted for the same,” the Ministry said in a notice.

MCA 21 is the portal for companies to submit their filings electronically to the government under the Companies Act.

A raft of provisions have been introduced in the new that replaces the nearly six-decade old Companies Act, 1956.

In terms of compliance, companies have slightly different requirements under the new Act and new electronic forms (e-forms) have been issued by the Ministry.

The Ministry, which is implementing the Companies Act, had earlier faced glitches with respect to functioning of MCA 21 due to various factors.

Most provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 came into force from April 1.

Among others, corporates are now required to furnish Permanent Account Number (PAN) while submitting their annual returns to the government, a move that would help in sharing of information between different departments.

So far, companies were not asked to provide PAN in the electronic form used for filing annual returns.

A new column has been inserted for providing PAN in the MGT-7 form — which is used for submitting the annual returns.

Meanwhile, the Ministry has already made a draft of changes to the Companies Act, 2013. Besides, various rules have been amended.

Amid concerns expressed in various quarters about certain provisions in the new Act, a high-level panel has also been set up to look into the issue.

Ease of doing business: Minimum Capital requirement, etc scrapped.

Companies Amendment Act, 2015 has brought in certain provisions making way for Ease of doing business in India.

The Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, had approved the changes in various provisions of the new Companies Act, 2013, which came into force with effect from April 1, 2014.

 

Minimum Capital requirement scrapped.

In the previous system, every company has to give a declaration to the Registrar of Companies (RoC), stating its paid-up capital is not less than Rs 500,000 in the case of public companies and not less than Rs 100,000 in the case of private companies, before commencement of business and exercising borrowing powers. The minimum paid-up capital requirement compliance and getting the certificate of commencement of business based on the above have been a hindrance for many small businesses.

Now, the minimum paid-up capital criteria have been scrapped, as per the Companies Amendment Act, 2015. Thus, a company can be formed even for small paltry amount of Rs. 10,000 and go ahead with doing business. The need to get the business commencement certificate based on the above compliance, is also dispensed with as per the Companies Amendment Act, 2015.

Common Seal made optional

Another provision under the Companies Amendment Act, 2015, towards Ease of doing business in India, is making Common Seal optional.

As a consequence, changes have been made with regards to authorization for execution of documents [Sections 9, 12, 22, 46 and 223], which made execution of documents, in the past, with  signatures of 2 directors under a Common Seal.

Schedules of Companies Act, 2013 and the corresponding provisions under Companies Act, 1956

 

 

Table containing Schedules of Companies Act, 2013 as notified up to date and corresponding provisions thereof under Companies Act, 1956

Note: This is a ready reckoner for the information of stakeholders. Please refer to the relevant notifications and circulars issued separately.

Schedule. No. as per the Companies Act, 2013 (as notified – 282 sections)
Schedules corresponding to the provisions of Companies Act, 1956
Schedule I Schedule I
Schedule II Schedule XIV
Schedule III Schedule VI
Schedule IV Nil
Schedule V Schedule XIII
Schedule VI Nil
Schedule VII Nil