https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237902 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the company's decision to extend the financial year by three months as legal and valid. The judgment clarified that there is no specific timing requirement in Section 210 of the Companies Act, 1956 for deciding on extending the financial year, emphasizing practicality and flexibility in such decisions to address unforeseen circumstances. Extensions beyond three months would necessitate approval from the Registrar of Companies to ensure justification. en-us Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237902 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the company's decision to extend the financial year by three months as legal and valid. The judgment clarified that there is no specific timing requirement in Section 210 of the Companies Act, 1956 for deciding on extending the financial year, emphasizing practicality and flexibility in such decisions to address unforeseen circumstances. Extensions beyond three months would necessitate approval from the Registrar of Companies to ensure justification. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237902