ROC Imposes Rs 37.5 thousand Penalty for Failure to Maintain Functional Registered Office:

The ROC has imposed a penalty on Company and its Directors for violating Section 12(1) of the Companies Act, as the registered office was incapable of receiving and acknowledging official communications.
Undelivered Postal Communications Amount to Statutory Violation

ROC Imposes Rs 37.5 thousand Penalty for Failure to Maintain Functional Registered Office
The Registrar of Companies, Mumbai (ROC), has received Form DIR-12 filed by Karmic Stock Broking Private Limited with respect to the removal of one of the directors under Section 169, and the ROC issued a clarification letter regarding the same and dispatched the copy to the registered office of the company, which was returned by postal authorities marking it as unclaimed by the addressee. Later, on 24th March, 2026, a show cause notice was issued to the company for default of Section 12(1).
On representation, the company argued that a postal remark claiming the addressee as absent cannot automatically lead to a violation of section 12(1) and submitted that directors directly manage office operations and also the ongoing construction at the registered office restricted the office access, and hence, it was pleaded that these temporary situations could not be construed as non-maintenance under Section 12.
On May 2, 2026, an inspection was conducted, which revealed that the office premises remain closed. The registrar held that the Company has failed to produce evidence that would have been convincing enough to show that the registered office is operational and capable of receiving official communications.
[related id="422227."]
The registrar held that the Company has failed to maintain the registered office and, after exercising power under Section 454 levied a penalty under Section 12(8) of Rs 7500 on Karmic Stock Broking Private Limited and Rs 7500 on each director, namely Mr Sanjiv V Dhami, Mr Arvind L Jain, Mr Tarun Dhami Hiralal and Mr Kamini Sanjiv Dhami, amounting to a total penalty of Rs 37.5 thousand.
The company and the directors have been directed to rectify the default and pay the penalty within 90 days from receipt of the order, failing which consequences under Section 454(8) of the Companies Act, 2013 may follow.
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].
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
2433My Recent Articles
- RBI Extends FLA Return Filing Deadline to July 31, 2026; Changes Official Email for Queries
- ITAT Holds Carbon Credit Receipts Not Taxable, Directs Exclusion from Section 115JB ComputationPremium
- ITAT Deletes Rs 1.32 Crore Section 69A Addition; Holds Recorded Sales Cannot Be Treated as Unexplained Income Without ProofPremium
- ITAT Upholds Disallowance of Rs 1.80 Lakh 80GGC Deduction Over Bogus Political Donation ClaimPremium
- ITAT Grants Taxpayer a Final Opportunity to Explain Rs 2.27 Crore Cash Deposits Under Section 69APremium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Tags
Recent Posts

All Posts








