Companies Act

Extension of period of company name reservation – ROC empowered to extend period by 60 days

Extension of period of company name reservation – ROC empowered to extend period by 60 days for name reserved under rule 9 using SPICe+

MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, 24th December, 2020

G.S.R. 795(E).—In exercise of powers conferred by section 3, sub-section (1) of section 7 and sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 469 of the Companies Act, 2013 ( 18 of 2013), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 namely:-

1. (1) These rules may be called the Companies (Incorporation) Third Amendment Rules, 2020.

(2) Save as otherwise provided in these rules, they shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 (herein after referred to as the said rules),after rule 9, the following rule shall be inserted with effect from 26th January, 2021, namely:-

9A. Extension of reservation of name in certain cases–

Upon payment of fees provided below through the web service available at www.mca.gov.in, the Registrar shall extend the period of a name reserved under rule 9 by using web service SPICe+ (Simplified Proforma for Incorporating Company Electronically Plus: INC-32), upto:

(a) forty days from the date of approval under rule 9, on payment of fees of rupees of one thousand rupees made before the expiry of twenty days from the date of approval under rule 9;

(b) sixty days from the date of approval under rule 9 on payment of fees of rupees two thousand made before the expiry of forty days referred to in clause (a) above;

(c) sixty days from the date of approval under rule 9 on payment of fees of rupees three thousand made before the expiry of twenty days from the date of approval under rule 9:

Provided that the Registrar shall have the power to cancel the reserved name in accordance with sub-section (5) of section 4 of the Act.”

3. In the said rules, in the annexure, in SPICe+ (Simplified Proforma for Incorporating Company Electronically Plus FORM NO. INC-32), for Part –A, the following part shall be substituted, namely:-

“Part-A

[F. No. 1/13/2013 CL-V, Vol .III]
K.V.R. MURTY, Jt. Secy.

Note: The principal rules were published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 250(E), dated the 31st March, 2014 and last amended vide number G.S.R.169 (E), dated the 12th March, 2020.

Download Notification 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 days 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…

2 days 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…

4 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…

5 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…

6 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…

6 days ago