JIO Public issue source Business standard

 Jio Platforms Ltd (JPL), the Reliance Industries-controlled company that houses India’s largest telecom operator and a growing portfolio of digital businesses, filed its draft red herring prospectus (DRHP) on Friday for what could become India’s largest-ever public offering. The company could raise about ₹37,700 crore through the listing, according to people familiar with the matter, valuing the business nearly ₹9.5 trillion. The filing comes as Jio Platforms prepares its next growth phase, including plans for a sovereign low-earth-orbit (LEO) satellite constellation and AI-native services embedded directly into its network.

 

The DRHP is set to lead to the first public listing of a consumer-facing Reliance business. It comes a decade after Reliance Jio’s launch in 2016, which reshaped India’s telecom industry through free voice services and low-cost mobile data. It will be the second IPO from RIL in recent years. It demerged its erstwhile subsidiary Jio Finance into a separate entity and listed it on BSE in August 2023.

According to the DRHP, the IPO will comprise a fresh issue of up to 270 million shares with a face value of ₹10 each. The final issue price will be determined through the book-building process in accordance with Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) regulations. People familiar with the matter said the issuance represents aboutN 2.9 per cent of post-issue share capital. 

At an implied valuation of nearly ₹9.5 trillion (more than $100 billion), the offering would surpass the size of the National Stock Exchange’s proposed public issue, which filed its own DRHP earlier this week and is expected to raise about ₹30,000 crore, according to industry insiders.

DPT 3 EXTENSION

 CA General Circular No. 02/2026 dated June 19, 2026 bearing F.No. Policy-02/2/2020-CL-V-MCA extends the due date for filing Form DPT-3 (Return of Deposits) for FY 2025-26 from 30 June 2026 to 31 July 2026 without payment of additional fees. Extension granted due to capacity enhancement and restoration activities at MCA Data Center following a fire incident on 05 June 2026. Applicable to all companies required to file DPT-3 under Rule 16 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014 read with Section 73 of the Companies Act, 2013. 

Filing after 31 July 2026 will attract additional fees as normal. Issued with approval of competent authority and signed by Indrajit Vania, Joint Director (Policy)

UCO CEO and Managing Director source Business standard

 UCO Bank has assigned the additional charge of managing director and chief executive officer (MD & CEO) to Rajendra Kumar Saboo, executive director of the bank, according to an exchange filing. The appointment follows a vacancy in the top post after the completion of former MD & CEO Ashwani Kumar's term on May 31.

 

Saboo has been entrusted with the additional charge with effect from June 19, 2026. According to the bank's regulatory filing, he will hold the position until August 31, or until a regular incumbent is appointed, or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

 

“We hereby inform that the Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, has conveyed the assignment of additional charge of the post of Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer of UCO Bank to Shri Rajendra Kumar Saboo, Executive Director, UCO Bank,” the bank said in the exchange filing.

Admissibility of entries in the books of account

 

The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (Indian Evidence Act 2023) Section 28 deals with the admissibility of entries in the books of account as evidence in legal proceedings. According to this section, entries in the books of account, whether they are in physical or electronic form, are not sufficient evidence on their own to charge any person with liability.

In simpler terms, just because something is written or recorded in a company's financial records doesn't automatically make it true or legally binding. The law recognizes that there can be inaccuracies, manipulations, or errors in accounting entries, and relying solely on these entries may not provide a complete picture or establish liability.

Therefore, if a court is inquiring into a matter and relies solely on the entries in the books of account as evidence, Section 28 stipulates that such entries are not enough. The court will need additional evidence to substantiate any claims or charges against a person. This ensures that a more thorough investigation is conducted and that judgments are based on a broader range of evidence, not just accounting records.

Other types of evidence that may be required could include witness testimonies, documents, contracts, invoices, bank statements, or expert opinions, depending on the specifics of the case. These additional sources of evidence help corroborate or challenge the information provided in the books of account, providing a more comprehensive understanding for the court to make a fair and informed decision.

Top of Form

 

Penalties and Fines under Companies Act 2013

 

Under the Companies Act 2013, there are provisions for penalties and fines for various non-compliances and violations. These penalties aim to ensure that companies adhere to the prescribed rules and regulations, maintaining transparency and accountability in their operations. Here are some instances where penalties and fines may be imposed:

1.    Late Filing: If a company fails to submit its financial statements, annual returns, or other required documents within the specified timeframes, penalties can be levied. The amount of the penalty may vary based on the duration of the delay.

2.    Non-compliance with AGM: As in the case mentioned earlier, if a company fails to hold its Annual General Meeting (AGM) within the mandated timeframe, there can be penalties imposed by the Registrar of Companies.

3.    Violation of Corporate Governance Norms: Companies are expected to adhere to corporate governance norms, failure of which can result in penalties. This includes issues like non-appointment of required directors, non-maintenance of statutory registers, etc.

4.    Mismanagement or Misrepresentation: If there is evidence of mismanagement, misleading financial statements, or misrepresentation of facts by the company, penalties may be imposed on the directors or officers responsible.

5.    Non-compliance with Specific Sections: The Companies Act has various sections covering different aspects of corporate functioning. Non-compliance with any of these sections could attract penalties or fines depending on the nature and severity of the violation.

The Registrar of Companies (RoC) is generally responsible for overseeing compliance with these regulations. The fines and penalties can vary in amount and severity, sometimes escalating if the non-compliance persists or if it's a repeated offense.

It's essential for companies to be aware of these provisions and ensure strict adherence to the regulations to avoid facing penalties and fines that can impact their financial health and reputation. Compliance not only avoids legal issues but also ensures trust among stakeholders and investors in the company's operations.

Top of Form

 

Adjudications proceedings under Companies Act, 2013

 

Adjudication proceedings under the Companies Act 2013 involve a legal process initiated by regulatory authorities (like the Registrar of Companies or National Company Law Tribunal) to address non-compliance or violations by a company or its officers. Here's a breakdown:

1.    Nature of Proceedings: Adjudication proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature, meaning they involve a process similar to a court trial but are conducted by administrative or regulatory bodies empowered under the law.

2.    Purpose: The primary aim is to address alleged breaches of the Companies Act provisions, regulations, or directives. These breaches can encompass various aspects, including non-filing or delayed filing of statutory documents, violations related to corporate governance, mismanagement, fraud, or any other non-compliance stipulated under the Act.

3.    Initiation: The proceedings typically commence when the regulatory authority, upon inspection or based on complaints or reports, identifies potential violations by a company or its officers. The authority issues a show-cause notice detailing the alleged non-compliance and providing an opportunity for the company or concerned individuals to present their case.

4.    Evidence and Hearings: The entity or individuals involved in the alleged violation have the chance to respond, provide explanations, and present evidence to defend themselves against the accusations. Hearings or meetings may be conducted where both parties can present their arguments and evidence.

5.    Adjudication: Following the presentation of evidence and arguments from both sides, the adjudicating authority examines the case and delivers its judgment. This judgment can involve imposing penalties, fines, or other corrective actions as deemed necessary by the authority. The decision is usually based on the severity of the breach, the impact on stakeholders, and the gravity of the violation.

6.    Appeals: In most cases, there is a provision for appealing the decision of the adjudicating authority to a higher court or tribunal if the concerned party disagrees with the judgment.

7.    Outcome: Depending on the findings, the outcome can involve imposing penalties, fines, directing corrective actions, disqualification of directors, or other measures aimed at rectifying the non-compliance and ensuring future adherence to the law.

Adjudication proceedings serve as an important mechanism to enforce compliance with corporate laws and regulations, promoting transparency, accountability, and good governance in the functioning of companies and their officers.

Top of Form

 

Compounding under Companies Act 2013

 

Compounding under the Companies Act 2013 provides a mechanism for companies and their officers to settle certain offenses or breaches of the law by paying a prescribed penalty without undergoing a lengthy legal trial. Here's a detailed explanation:

1.    Nature of Compounding: Compounding is a process that allows for the settlement of offenses related to non-compliance or violations of specific provisions under the Companies Act 2013. Instead of facing prosecution, the company or its officers can apply for compounding by admitting to the offense and paying a prescribed penalty.

2.    Eligibility for Compounding: Not all offenses are eligible for compounding. The Act specifies offenses that are compoundable, and these typically involve procedural or technical lapses rather than severe breaches that require extensive legal action. Offenses that are of a serious nature, involving fraud or substantial harm to stakeholders, may not be compoundable.

3.    Application Process: The company or its officers must submit an application for compounding to the Registrar of Companies (RoC) or the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), depending on the nature of the offense. The application includes details of the offense, the circumstances, and the proposed terms for settlement.

4.    Consideration and Approval: The concerned authority evaluates the application, considering various factors such as the nature and gravity of the offense, the impact on stakeholders, past record of compliance, etc. If deemed fit, they may approve the compounding application with specific terms and conditions.

5.    Payment of Penalty: Upon approval, the applicant is required to pay the prescribed penalty amount as determined by the authority. This penalty is often a pre-determined sum specified for each offense or a calculated amount based on the severity and impact of the violation.

6.    Effect of Compounding: Once the penalty is paid and the compounding process is completed, the offense is considered settled, and the company or individuals involved will not face further legal proceedings or prosecution for that particular offense.

7.    Non-Compliance with Compounding Terms: If the company or its officers fail to comply with the terms and conditions specified during the compounding process, the authority may revoke the compounding order, leading to the initiation of legal proceedings for the original offense.

Compounding provides an avenue for companies and individuals to rectify certain lapses without undergoing a full trial, promoting a quicker resolution of minor offenses while emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory requirements.

Top of Form