Skip to content

CS Executive · Company Law and Practice · Key Managerial Personnel and their Remuneration

Lotus Engineering Ltd's CFO resigned on 10 April and the Board appointed a replacement on 20 June, with the change particulars filed with the Registrar on 15 July. Which assessment fits the Companies Act, 2013 provisions?

The vacancy was validly filled because Section 203(4) allows the Board six months to fill a whole-time KMP vacancy at a Board meeting. The filing on 15 July is 25 days after the 20 June appointment, within the thirty days in Section 170(2).

  1. AThe vacancy was filled within six months under Section 203(4), and the filing on 15 July is within thirty days of the 20 June appointment under Section 170(2)Correct
  2. BThe appointment is invalid because a CFO vacancy must be filled within thirty days
  3. CThe filing is late because it should have been made within thirty days of the 10 April resignation only
  4. DThe Board could not fill the vacancy because it requires a general meeting resolution

Explanation

Section 203(4) lets the Board fill a whole-time KMP vacancy at a Board meeting within six months; 20 June is within that period. Section 170(2) requires filing within thirty days of the change; 15 July is 25 days after 20 June, so it is timely. The resignation itself would also need its own change filing, but the new appointment filing is in time.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Key Managerial Personnel and their Remuneration shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Key Managerial Personnel and their RemunerationFree diagnostic mock

More Key Managerial Personnel and their Remuneration questions