MCA asks stakeholders to report any malpractice/irregularity in company name reservation / incorporation
The Companies (Incorporation) Rules 2014 contains the rules regarding company name reservation. According to Rule 9 an application for reservation of name shall be made online in Form SPICe+ (INC-32) which may either be approved or rejected, as the case may be, by the Registrar, Central Registration Centre (CRC) after allowing re-submission of such web form within fifteen days for rectification of the defects, if any.
Further in respect of names which resemble too nearly with the name of an existing company are forbidden. Rule 8 provides that a name applied for shall be deemed to resemble too nearly with the name of an existing company, if, and only if, after comparing the name applied for with the name of an existing company by disregarding the matters set out in sub-rule (2), the names are same.
The approval of the company name is given by Registrar, Central Registration Centre (CRC)
MCA by its advisory has stated that the processing of application forms for the purpose of name reservation and incorporation at the Central Reservation Centre (CRC) is faceless and randomised. The applications if sent for resubmissions are normally not processed by the same official who has processed the application at the first instance. Stakeholders may inform the Ministry in case of any malpractice or irregularity on the part of any official/officer at CRC or any professional with supporting evidences at cvo-mca@gov.in for taking action in accordance with the extent CVC guidelines.
- Information in loose papers not corroborated with assessee, can’t be said to belong to assessee
- Setting aside remand order of CIT(A) without interfering with direction to delete addition, did not revive AO’s order
- Whether Arbitral Tribunal can grant a prohibited claim in a contract – Larger Bench to decide
- Court can examine contractual employee termination on sole ground of ineligibility
- Upon deceased acquiring family, as specified earlier GPF nomination became invalid – SC
