<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (12) TMI 65 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401266</link>
    <description>The Companies Act framework on disqualification and DIN deactivation was examined under Sections 164(2)(a) and 167(1) read with Rules 10(6), 11 and 14 of the Companies (Appointment and Qualifications of Directors) Rules, 2014. The governing principle is that the Registrar of Companies has no power to deactivate a Director Identification Number merely because a director is disqualified. Such deactivation is inconsistent with the statutory scheme, because a disqualified person may still need the DIN to regularise filings and comply with obligations for the defaulting company. The earlier binding view was followed, and DIN deactivation could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 65 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401266</link>
      <description>The Companies Act framework on disqualification and DIN deactivation was examined under Sections 164(2)(a) and 167(1) read with Rules 10(6), 11 and 14 of the Companies (Appointment and Qualifications of Directors) Rules, 2014. The governing principle is that the Registrar of Companies has no power to deactivate a Director Identification Number merely because a director is disqualified. Such deactivation is inconsistent with the statutory scheme, because a disqualified person may still need the DIN to regularise filings and comply with obligations for the defaulting company. The earlier binding view was followed, and DIN deactivation could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401266</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>