Query related to mgt-9

Option-I:

All individuals can be shown as promoters.  

[It may be noted that as per Sec.2(69)(a) a person who is identified in the annual return as such is a promoter.  Hence company can identify any person as a promoter.]

Option-II:

Such persons can be included in individuals under Item VI(i)(B)(2)(b) [Public Shareholding -- Non-Institutions -- Individuals].

Thank you sir for your reply.

But we have non -promoters consist of pvt. ltd. co. and LLP.

In that case Option-I:

All companies and LLPs can be shown as promoters.  

[It may be noted that as per Sec.2(69)(a) a person who is identified in the annual return as such is a promoter.  A person who has control over the affairs of the company, directly or indirectly, whether as a shareholder, director or otherwise is also a promoter.  Hence company can identify any person as a promoter. As per Section 3(42) of General Clauses Act 'person' includes company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not. ]  

Option-II:

Such company/LLP can be included in individuals under Item VI(i)(B)(2)(a)(i) [Public Shareholding -- Non-Institutions -- Bodies corporates - Indian].

Sir,

I have the same problem.

In my case Company has both Promoter & Non Promoter shareholders which includes (Individual, Body Corporate, LLP). In F.Y 2014-15, Company has borrowed unsecured loan from XY Pvt Ltd (NBFC Co. i.e - Non Promoter Shareholder) and one of the Directors is the same.

My query is that can I show that NBFC Company from which the Company has borrowed loan as a Promoter?

Friends, the traditional meaning of the term promoter (i.e. a person who is involved in formation of a company) is not more applicable under CA 2013.  The definition given in Sec.2(69) is very wide and now company can identify any person as its promoter in the annual return.  In your case also NBFC can also be identified as a promoter.

However, one precaution needs to be taken here.  The effect of declaring a person as a promoter is that he will be liable for action for non-compliances by the company in certain specified sections where promoter has also been made liable in addition to directors and other officers in default [e.g. Sec.7(6), 35(1)(c), 42(10) etc.].  Hence to avoid any dispute in future, it will be advisable to take his consent for his name being declared as a promoter, though  there is no provision for the same in the Act.

Thank you sir.