Notice under section 257
This query is : Resolved
14 September 2012
Sir/ Mam
Is it mandatory to send notices under 257 for directorship at the registered office of the ompany.
the provision talks about office of the company?
Moreover, should we attach the candidature of the directors received while intimating members under 257(1)
Need an urgent advice,Thanks.
Is it mandatory to send notices under 257 for directorship at the registered office of the ompany.
the provision talks about office of the company?
Moreover, should we attach the candidature of the directors received while intimating members under 257(1)
Need an urgent advice,Thanks.
14 September 2012
office of the company is construed as REGISTERED OFFICE CLAUSE.
14 September 2012
Sir, what if the company has been receiving all the notices at corporate office? will they be valid?
is there any case supporting this?
Thank you
is there any case supporting this?
Thank you
14 September 2012
If you have a valid acknowledgement to prove so, then go ahead.. no case law is required. Be in custody of the acknowledgement... the the question of corporate office, or central office, or registerred office or by whatever name called is IMMATERIAL
14 September 2012
thank you sir. But my concern is can anybody in AGM raise an issue that since Notice was not received at regd office, the candidature will remain cancelled?
14 September 2012
if you have a valid acknowledgement, then you can get away with all such queries.
15 September 2012
thank you so much Sir for correct guidance. Please request your kind advice on my second query as well.
just a simple mention of the names is enough under 257(1) or proper candidature received should be enclosed as well. I have learnt that in listed company's too, the candidature & consent letter is not enclosed while intimating members u/s 257(1)
just a simple mention of the names is enough under 257(1) or proper candidature received should be enclosed as well. I have learnt that in listed company's too, the candidature & consent letter is not enclosed while intimating members u/s 257(1)
15 September 2012
Ther is always a differrence between PRACTICE and LAW/ACT. The intent of the ACT is very clear... it is aiming at as many details as possible. I think at least, something needs to placed on the record that the request has moved from the member and not from the company.
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- ITR-3 - How to show loss in 65(i) - (iii) under under Part A - P & L section and sub section 65?
- Refund of Rs.4,00,000/- pursuant to Appeal Order – Deceased Proprietor & Closed Bank Account
- Filling ITR for FY 2024-25
- EXEMPTION OF LONG TERM GAIN UNDER SECTION 54F
- FOB freight
- Incidence of Tax - TDA
- Patient expenses
- Processing delay
- TDS Retunr Statement Status
- RCM PAYMENT OF APRIL 2025 NOT PAID IN YEAR AND NOW PAYING IN OCTOBER 2026 RETURN
- Composite medical service contract
- New old regime
- Experienced CA recommendation from Kolkata for FNO return filing
- Sales of goods of amount Rs77 lakhs to a party
- Tax Demand of ₹4,650 for AY 2026-27
- Concept of Vendor and customner reconciliation
- Mistake in e-invoice identified after 24 hours
- EXPORT PAYMENT
- NRI ITR2 account in 2025-26.
- Query regarding reporting of exempt foreign remuneration in ITR (AY 2026-27)
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
