https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408904 The HC upheld the constitutionality of Sections 164(2) and 167(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, affirming they do not violate Articles 14 or 19 of the Constitution. It ruled Section 164(2) is not retrospective, disqualifying directors only for defaults from FY 2014-15 onwards. The court found the provisos to Sections 164(2) and 167(1)(a) valid, with prospective application for disqualifications. The deactivation of DINs based solely on Section 164(2) disqualification was deemed unjustified, ordering their reactivation. Striking off a company does not automatically disqualify its directors. The writ petitions were disposed of with declarations and directions regarding these provisions. en-us Wed, 16 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Oct 2024 16:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408904 The HC upheld the constitutionality of Sections 164(2) and 167(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, affirming they do not violate Articles 14 or 19 of the Constitution. It ruled Section 164(2) is not retrospective, disqualifying directors only for defaults from FY 2014-15 onwards. The court found the provisos to Sections 164(2) and 167(1)(a) valid, with prospective application for disqualifications. The deactivation of DINs based solely on Section 164(2) disqualification was deemed unjustified, ordering their reactivation. Striking off a company does not automatically disqualify its directors. The writ petitions were disposed of with declarations and directions regarding these provisions. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 16 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408904