Section 173 of copmpanies act 2013

Meetings 7359 views 4 replies

Avinash Agrawal

Student CS

27 Points Posted on 20 September 2013

Sec. 173. (1) of the Companies Act, 2013 states that every company shall hold the first meeting of the Board of Directors within thirty days of the date of its incorporation and thereafter hold a minimum number of four meetings of its Board of Directors every year in such a manner that not more than 120 days shall intervene between two consecutive meetings of the Board:

(Assuming that this provision is made operational) My question is if the company is incorporated on say 31st November, 2013 how many Board meetings should be held before 31.03.2014?

According to me as per the new law 5 meetings should be held before 31.03.2014. What is your opinion?

Replies (4)

Gaurav

cs Final

57 Points Posted on 20 September 2013

Here every year means calender year.

In this case if company incorporated on 31 november 2013, then company can only hold one board meeting within 30 days. there is no scope for holding 4 more board meeting in the year of 2013.

In my point of view company has to hold only one board meeting within 30 days.

If company hold BM earlier than 30 days than company has to hold more 4 meetings

P C Agrawal

Registered independent director Past Ch

8229 Points Posted on 20 September 2013

Section 173 of new Act has not yet come into force.

Here the word 'year' refers to calendar year and not financial year.

Ajay Mishra

Company Secretary

74352 Points Posted on 22 September 2013

Agree with Mr. Agrawal Opinion..

Please wait for few days for more clairty thereon.

komal

Student CA Final

21 Points Posted on 23 October 2015

provided section 173 is that notice is to be delieverd at the director's registered adderss(whether in india or outside india).so this concept of "in india or outside india" is related with alternate and original director.

so my query is that if notice delieverd to only alternate director then can original director claim that the resolution passed is invalid in that B.M. stating that notice was not delieverd to him?

PLzzzzzz reply