https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393662 The High Court of Calcutta clarified that disqualification of a Director Identification Number (DIN) under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 applies only to the defaulting company and not to all other companies where the individual serves as a Director. The Court distinguished between 're-appointed' and 'appointed' Directors, stating that disqualification affects re-appointment in the defaulting company but only fresh appointments in other companies. The judgment emphasized that post the Amendment to the Companies Act, 2013, Directors would be disqualified in all companies except the defaulting one if they incur disqualifications under Section 164(2) after the amendment. en-us Wed, 22 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jan 2021 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393662 The High Court of Calcutta clarified that disqualification of a Director Identification Number (DIN) under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 applies only to the defaulting company and not to all other companies where the individual serves as a Director. The Court distinguished between 're-appointed' and 'appointed' Directors, stating that disqualification affects re-appointment in the defaulting company but only fresh appointments in other companies. The judgment emphasized that post the Amendment to the Companies Act, 2013, Directors would be disqualified in all companies except the defaulting one if they incur disqualifications under Section 164(2) after the amendment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 22 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393662