What is the penalty for not mentioning DIN?

What is the penalty for not mentioning DIN?. As per section 158 of the companies Act 2013, there is Obligation to Indicate Director Identification Number.
Every person or company, while furnishing any return, information or particulars as are required to be furnished under this Act, shall mention the Director Identification Number in such return, information or particulars in case such return, information or particulars relate to the director or contain any reference of any director.
As per Section 172: -
"If a company is in default in complying with any of the provisions of this Chapter and for which no specific penalty or punishment is provided therein, the company and every officer of the company who is in default shall be liable to a penalty of fifty thousand rupees, and in case of continuing failure, with a further penalty of five hundred rupees for each day during which such failure continues, subject to a maximum of three lakh rupees in case of company and one lakh rupees in case of an officer who is in default."
Facts About of the case:
In APS Micro Credit & lnsurance Services India Private Limited Upon examining the financial statement for the financial year 2013-15 and 2014-15 that the company has not mentioned DIN number of the directors in place of authorization given by the Board of directors. However, every person or company, while furnishing any return, information or particulars as are required to be furnished under the Act, shall mention the DIN of director. Hence, the company has violated Section 158 of the Companies Act,2013.
Accordingly, upon submission of the Inspection Report, the Regional Director (SR) has directed to take action against the defaulters as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. Since the company was strike off and the Managing Director of the company Mr. Avoudiappan Senthilvelu was deceased as per the Inspection report, the Adjudicating Authority had issued notice only to Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar, director of the company. No reply has been received from the director Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar.
Adjudication of Penalty
It is noticed that the director's DIN was not mentioned in the signed financial statements attached along with Form 23AC for the financial year ending on 2013-14 & signed financial statement attached along with form AOC-4 for the financial year 201415.Therefore, the company has contravened Section 158 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the director Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar is liable under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 2013.
After considering facts, circumstances and submissions made by the authorised representative on the behalf of the company, the concerned ROC impose a penalty as prescribed under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 2013. The details of the penalty imposed on the Company and Officers in default are shown in the table below:

Name of the director

Financial Year

Penalty for default

Maximum Limit Penalty

Penalty Impose

Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar

2013-14

50,000 +500 (Per day for continuing failure)

Rs. 1,00,000

Rs. 50,000

2014-15

Rs. 1,00,000

Rs. 50,000

Any Benefit of Section 446B of Companies Act
Section 446B of the Companies Act, 2013 provides a significant relief mechanism for small companies and start-ups by reducing the penalty burden for certain non-compliances. Under this provision, if a small company or a start-up commits a default for which a penalty is prescribed under the Act, the penalty imposed shall not be more than half of the specified penalty, subject to a maximum limit.
In this MCA adjudication order as the company has not filed its statutory returns since its incorporation, the benefits of small company are not extended to this company while adjudicating the penalty.
CCL Observation: -
The case of APS Micro Credit & Insurance Services India Private Limited highlights the importance of compliance with statutory requirements under the Companies Act, 2013. Failure to mention the Director Identification Number (DIN) in financial statements, as mandated by Section 158, resulted in penal action under Section 172. This highlights the necessity for companies and their officers to ensure fulfilment to every regulatory obligation, as non-compliance can lead to financial penalties and legal consequences. Furthermore, the inability to avail benefits under Section 446B due to prolonged non-filing of statutory returns emphasizes the need for consistent compliance to retain regulatory advantages. This case serves as a reminder for companies to maintain proper corporate governance and promptly fulfil their statutory obligations to avoid penal repercussions.
Download ROC Order

As per section 158 of the companies Act 2013, there is Obligation to Indicate Director Identification Number.

Every person or company, while furnishing any return, information or particulars as are required to be furnished under this Act, shall mention the Director Identification Number in such return, information or particulars in case such return, information or particulars relate to the director or contain any reference of any director.

As per Section 172: -

"If a company is in default in complying with any of the provisions of this Chapter and for which no specific penalty or punishment is provided therein, the company and every officer of the company who is in default shall be liable to a penalty of fifty thousand rupees, and in case of continuing failure, with a further penalty of five hundred rupees for each day during which such failure continues, subject to a maximum of three lakh rupees in case of company and one lakh rupees in case of an officer who is in default."

Facts About of the case:

In APS Micro Credit & lnsurance Services India Private Limited Upon examining the financial statement for the financial year 2013-15 and 2014-15 that the company has not mentioned DIN number of the directors in place of authorization given by the Board of directors. However, every person or company, while furnishing any return, information or particulars as are required to be furnished under the Act, shall mention the DIN of director. Hence, the company has violated Section 158 of the Companies Act,2013.

Accordingly, upon submission of the Inspection Report, the Regional Director (SR) has directed to take action against the defaulters as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. Since the company was strike off and the Managing Director of the company Mr. Avoudiappan Senthilvelu was deceased as per the Inspection report, the Adjudicating Authority had issued notice only to Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar, director of the company. No reply has been received from the director Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar.

Adjudication of Penalty

It is noticed that the director's DIN was not mentioned in the signed financial statements attached along with Form 23AC for the financial year ending on 2013-14 & signed financial statement attached along with form AOC-4 for the financial year 201415.Therefore, the company has contravened Section 158 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the director Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar is liable under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 2013.

After considering facts, circumstances and submissions made by the authorised representative on the behalf of the company, the concerned ROC impose a penalty as prescribed under Section 172 of the Companies Act, 2013. The details of the penalty imposed on the Company and Officers in default are shown in the table below:

Name of the director	Financial Year	Penalty for default	Maximum Limit Penalty	Penalty Impose
Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar	2013-14	50,000 +500 (Per day for continuing failure)	Rs. 1,00,000	Rs. 50,000
Mr. Avoodaiyappan Selvakumar	2014-15	50,000 +500 (Per day for continuing failure)	Rs. 1,00,000	Rs. 50,000

Any Benefit of Section 446B of Companies Act

Section 446B of the Companies Act, 2013 provides a significant relief mechanism for small companies and start-ups by reducing the penalty burden for certain non-compliances. Under this provision, if a small company or a start-up commits a default for which a penalty is prescribed under the Act, the penalty imposed shall not be more than half of the specified penalty, subject to a maximum limit.

In this MCA adjudication order as the company has not filed its statutory returns since its incorporation, the benefits of small company are not extended to this company while adjudicating the penalty.

CCL Observation: -

The case of APS Micro Credit & Insurance Services India Private Limited highlights the importance of compliance with statutory requirements under the Companies Act, 2013. Failure to mention the Director Identification Number (DIN) in financial statements, as mandated by Section 158, resulted in penal action under Section 172. This highlights the necessity for companies and their officers to ensure fulfilment to every regulatory obligation, as non-compliance can lead to financial penalties and legal consequences. Furthermore, the inability to avail benefits under Section 446B due to prolonged non-filing of statutory returns emphasizes the need for consistent compliance to retain regulatory advantages. This case serves as a reminder for companies to maintain proper corporate governance and promptly fulfil their statutory obligations to avoid penal repercussions.