- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
DINs of disqualified directors to be analyzed under the Companies Act
DINs of disqualified directors to be analyzed under the Companies Act Ministry of Corporate Affairs reexamines barring of erring firms' directors The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) is working on lifting the red flag on directors who completed a five-year disqualification for the default of the companies they were associated with. The ministry notified that the...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to 
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
DINs of disqualified directors to be analyzed under the Companies Act
Ministry of Corporate Affairs reexamines barring of erring firms' directors
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) is working on lifting the red flag on directors who completed a five-year disqualification for the default of the companies they were associated with.
The ministry notified that the Director Identification Numbers (DINs) of directors found to be disqualified post-demonetization, has been deflagged, as the duration of the restriction was over.
The DIN is an 8-digit single identification number assigned by the central government. It is given to every person who wants to be a director of any business or who already is an executive of any company. Once granted, the DIN number has life-long validity.
The DINs were flagged under a section of the Companies Act, which specified certain defaults by companies for which the directors were held responsible. These included companies defaulting on filing financial statements or annual returns for three years.
The Ministry had deactivated more than 19 lakh DINs in its database due to non-filing of Know Your Client (KYC) and over four lakh directors were disqualified under the provisions of the Act. (The terms 'Ghost Directors' and 'Shell Companies' were not defined in the Companies Act, 2013).
The lifting of the red flag would mean that these directors could now be re-appointed as a director of that company or any other company.


