Company, Directors Fined by ROC for Non-Compliance with Registered Office Rules:

ROC imposed penalties on a company and its directors for failing to maintain a functional registered office.
Firm Penalised Over Undelivered Notices

Company, Directors Fined by ROC for Non-Compliance with Registered Office Rules
The Registrar of Companies, Mumbai-I, has penalised a company and its directors for failing to maintain a proper registered office as per the Companies Act, 2013.
According to the ROC order, a show cause notice was issued on March 24, 2026, under Section 454 read with Section 12(8) of the Act after the letters sent to the registered office of the company were returned repeatedly as undelivered with postal remarks like "Unclaimed" and "Addressee Absent".
The company said the postal remarks alone were not enough evidence of non-compliance. The company said that the reasons for delivery failures may be a temporary lack of staff, limited operations in the office due to health issues of one of the directors and ongoing construction work at the premises. Apart from this, the company has submitted photographs of the office premises and an electricity bill as supporting documents.
But the ROC was not satisfied with the explanation. On May 2, 2026, during the inspection, officials found that the company's name board was displayed at the premises, but the office had remained closed. Also, another letter sent by the ROC on May 11, 2026 also was stamped with postal remarks "Addressee Absent".
The ROC observed that as per Section 12(1) of the Companies Act, every company shall have and maintain a place at its registered office, where all communications and notices may be addressed and where they shall be received and acknowledged at all times.
As the company qualified as a small company under Section 2(85) of the Companies Act, the penalty amount was reduced by half. Accordingly, a penalty of Rs.7,500 each was imposed on the company and its directors.
About Author
Vanshika verma
Content Writer
Vanshika Verma is a Content Writer with 1+ year of experience at Studycafe.in. A B.Com graduate from Delhi University, She writes articles on Finance, Tax, ICAI, GST, and the latest financial news, with a focus on making complex topics easy for readers and professionals.
Vanshika Verma is a Content Writer with 1+ year of experience at Studycafe.in. A B.Com graduate from Delhi University, She writes articles on Finance, Tax, ICAI, GST, and the latest financial news, with a focus on making complex topics easy for readers and professionals.
Studycafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
1642My Recent Articles
- ITAT Deletes Rs 1.24 Crore Additions Over Form 26A and Cash PaymentsPremium
- ITAT Pune Sends Tax Dispute Back to CIT(A) Over Rule 46A ViolationPremium
- ITAT Sets Aside Ex Parte Rejection of Section 12A and 80G Applications, Orders Fresh HearingPremium
- ITAT Cancels Rs 9.27 Lakh Penalty, Directs Tax Department to Grant Immunity to AssesseePremium
- ITAT Sends Cooperative Society’s Section 80P Interest Claim Back to AO for Fresh ExaminationPremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








