https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766571 The HC dismissed a petition challenging penalty imposed under Section 454(3) of Companies Act, 2013 for non-compliance with Section 203(4) regarding managerial personnel appointments. The court held that while the Registrar has discretion in imposing penalties under Section 203(5), once contravention is established, penalty must follow regardless of intent. The adjudicating authority properly exercised discretion by providing COVID-period relief while calculating the fine for continuing violations spanning years. The court found no illegality or arbitrariness in the penalty quantum imposed, refusing to interfere with the authority's decision. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2025 08:23:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766571 The HC dismissed a petition challenging penalty imposed under Section 454(3) of Companies Act, 2013 for non-compliance with Section 203(4) regarding managerial personnel appointments. The court held that while the Registrar has discretion in imposing penalties under Section 203(5), once contravention is established, penalty must follow regardless of intent. The adjudicating authority properly exercised discretion by providing COVID-period relief while calculating the fine for continuing violations spanning years. The court found no illegality or arbitrariness in the penalty quantum imposed, refusing to interfere with the authority's decision. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766571