Companies Act

AOC4 XBRL to be filed even if company not fall under specified class in succeeding years

AOC4 XBRL to be filed even if the company do not fall under the specified class of companies in succeeding years-MCA Notification

The Government has amended the Companies (Filing of Documents and Forms in Extensible Business Reporting Language) Rules, 2015. MCA has notified the Companies (Filing of Documents and Forms in Extensible Business Reporting Language) Amendment Rules, 2018.

Under the existing Rule 3 the following class of companies (excluding companies in Banking, lnsurance, Power Sector and Non Banking Financial companies ) are required to file their financial statement and other documents under section 137 of the Companies Act, 2013 with the Registrar of Companies (RoC) in e-form AOC-4 XBRL:-

(i) all companies listed with any Stock Exchange(s) in India and their Indian subsidiaries; or

(ii) all companies having paid up capital of rupees five crore or above;

(iii) all companies having turnover of rupees hundred crore or above; or

(iv) all companies which were hitherto covered under the Companies (Filing of Documents and Forms in Extensible Business Reporting Language) Rules, 2011.

It has been now provided that the companies which have filed their financial statements under existing Rule 3 shall continue to file their financial statements and other documents though they may not fall under the class of companies specified therein in succeeding years.

Similarly it has been provided that the companies which have filed their financial statements under the erstwhile rules, namely the Companies (Filing of Documents and Forms in Extensible Business Reporting Language) Rules, 2011, shall continue to file their financial statements and other documents as prescribed in existing rule 3 though they do not fall under the class of companies specified therein.

Download MCA Notification [F. No. 1/19/2013 –CL V] dated 8th March, 2018  Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

2 hours ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

4 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

4 days ago