445-Day Delay in MGT-14 Filing Costs Company and Directors Rs. 2.04 Lakh:

ROC penalised the company and its directors with Rs. 2.04 Lakh for a 445-day delay in filing MGT-14 for a special resolution under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013.
ROC Penalises Company and Directors for Delay in Filing Special Resolution

445-Day Delay in MGT-14 Filing Costs Company and Directors Rs. 2.04 Lakh
The Registrar of Companies (ROC) Ahmedabad has recently issued an Adjudication Order dated January 08, 2026, under Section 454 of the Companies Act, 2013, imposing a penalty on a company and its three directors for the contravention of Section 117(2) of the Act.
The dispute is related to a company named SMR Jewels Limited with CIN U74999GJ2018PLC104946 and its three directors named Drashti Pal Modi, Vismay Manojkumar Soni, and Jainil Virendra Soni. The company in default had itself accepted the violation committed by it under Section 117(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, by filing a suo moto adjudication application and seeking resolution of the matter.
A special resolution was issued by the company on May 18, 2024, for issuing equity shares through private placement. According to the law, the company should have filed Form MGT-14 with the ROC within 30 days. Meaning on or before June 17, 2024. However, the company delayed in filing the same. The form was furnished on September 05, 2025, under SRN AB6554124. This resulted in a total delay of 445 days in filing the Special Resolution. As per the violation committed, the company and its directors are liable for penal action under Section 117(2) of the Companies Act, 2013.
As a result, the ROC Ahmedabad imposed a penalty of Rs. 54,500 on the company and Rs. 1,50,000 on its three directors (Rs. 50,000 on each director). Additionally, it asked the company and its director to rectify the aforesaid default and pay the levied penalty fee within 90 days from receiving the present order.
Also, asserted that if the company and its directors are not satisfied with the present order, they are allowed to further challenge it before the Regional Director, RD Ahmedabad, within a period of sixty days from the date of receiving the order.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2389My Recent Articles
- ITAT Remands Section 69 Unexplained Cash Credit Addition After Bank Statement Was Not ExaminedPremium
- ITAT Remands Transfer Pricing Dispute: DRP to Reassess Comparables and Working Capital AdjustmentPremium
- CBDT Notifies TDS Exemption on Aircraft Lease Payments to IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction Scheme Premium
- CBDT Grants TDS Exemption On Ship Leasing Payments To IFSC Units Under 20-Year Tax Deduction SchemePremium
- ITAT Remands Case to CIT(A) After Admitting Crucial Sale Deed as Additional Evidence
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








