CA, CS, CMA : Focusing only on receivables can miss significant risks embedded in related-party payables. A bilateral review reveals internal gr...
Company Law : The article explains when Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals are required for Related Party Transactions. It provid...
Company Law : The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law...
Company Law : The analysis clarified that shareholder protection is ensured through ultimate parent consolidation. Hence, intermediate companies...
SEBI : The updated Regulation 23 framework introduces turnover-linked thresholds for related party transactions. Listed companies must re...
Company Law : The Ministry of Corporate Affairs details measures to ensure transparency and prevent fund diversion in Related-Party Transactions...
SEBI : SEBI is consulting on amendments to LODR Regulations regarding Related Party Transactions. Proposals include new materiality thres...
Company Law : NFRA highlights auditor responsibilities in related party transactions, emphasizing compliance with Ind AS 24, SEBI regulations, a...
SEBI : SEBI seeks public feedback on strengthening secretarial compliance reports, auditor appointment criteria, and related party transa...
SEBI : What does ‘Where a transaction is undertaken between members of the consolidated entity (between the listed entity and its subsi...
Excise Duty : CESTAT Chandigarh held that the manufacturer and marketing company could not be treated as related persons under the Central Excis...
Income Tax : In a landmark ruling, the Delhi High Court held that government shareholders are not automatically considered related parties und...
SEBI : A detailed analysis of SAT Mumbai's decision to reduce SecureKloud Technologies' penalty for non-serious LODR violations, and its ...
Company Law : Bar of voting as per Section 188 of the Companies Act, 2013 on related parties operated only at the time of entering into a contra...
Income Tax : Commissioner issued a show cause notice under section 263 and ultimately passed impugned order; by that time the alleged domestic ...
Company Law : ROC Mumbai penalised a company and its directors for failing to disclose a related party loan transaction in the Board’s Report ...
Company Law : The authority penalized directors for executing related party transactions without fresh or valid approvals. It held that reliance...
Company Law : The company relied on old resolutions for ongoing related party transactions. The authority held that fresh approvals are mandator...
Company Law : The company continued related party transactions based on old approvals. The authority held that fresh approvals are mandatory, le...
Company Law : The issue involved non-compliance with approval requirements for related party transactions. The authority held that absence of Bo...
CESTAT Chandigarh held that the manufacturer and marketing company could not be treated as related persons under the Central Excise Act. As a result, the valuation-based excise demands and penalties were set aside.
Focusing only on receivables can miss significant risks embedded in related-party payables. A bilateral review reveals internal group funding structures, offsetting balances, and potential drawing power distortions.
The article explains when Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals are required for Related Party Transactions. It provides a practical framework for determining the correct approval level under the Companies Act and SEBI regulations.
The article explains how Audit Committee, Board, and shareholder approvals apply to related party transactions under corporate law. It highlights stricter compliance requirements for listed companies under SEBI regulations.
ROC Mumbai penalised a company and its directors for failing to disclose a related party loan transaction in the Board’s Report and Form AOC-4. The authority held that omission of the transaction violated Section 134(3)(h) of the Companies Act.
The analysis clarified that shareholder protection is ensured through ultimate parent consolidation. Hence, intermediate companies can still claim exemption under Section 188. The ruling highlights functional over literal interpretation.
The authority penalized directors for executing related party transactions without fresh or valid approvals. It held that reliance on outdated resolutions violates Section 188. The ruling stresses strict approval requirements.
The company relied on old resolutions for ongoing related party transactions. The authority held that fresh approvals are mandatory, imposing penalties for non-compliance.
The company continued related party transactions based on old approvals. The authority held that fresh approvals are mandatory, leading to penalties for non-compliance.
The issue involved non-compliance with approval requirements for related party transactions. The authority held that absence of Board resolution violates Section 188. The key takeaway is that proper approvals are mandatory for such transactions.
