Menu
Home
MCQs Home
CA Final SFM
CA Final FR
Free CA Final MCQs
Home
CA Final MCQs
Quiz
Q1. Will your answer for Q 98 change if the Company was a Private Company rather than a Public Company
Yes, the Fine for Private Company shall be half the fines notified for Public Company
Yes, the Fine for Private Company shall be twice the fines notified for Public Company
Yes, as provisions are Not Applicable to the Private Company
No, as no distinction is made under Act for Public and Private Company
Q2. Would contribution be valid in question no. 78 if A Ltd made contribution through Cash or Cheque which was not crossed
Yes, as contribution to political party does not necessarily have to be in account payee instrument
No, as account payee instruments are necessary as stipulated in Companies Act
Yes, as the amount is <= 10% of the turnover of the Company the use of Account payee instruments is not mandatory
No, as the amount is >= 10% of the turnover of the Company, hence the use of Account payee instruments is mandatory
Q3. What Form is prescribed for the maintenance of Register as stated above in Q No 94 as per Rule 14 of the Companies ( Meetings of Board and its Powers) Rules , 2014?
Imprison : <= 1 yr Fine: 25000-1 lakh Or Both
Imprison: <= 6 mt Fine: 25000-1 lakh Or Both
Imprison: <= 1 yr Fine: 25000- 50000 Or Both
Imprison: <= 6 mt Fine : 25000-50000 Or Both
Q4. In the above case, what are penal provisions applicable to the officers of the Company
Fine: 5000
Fine: 10000
Fine: 15000
Fine: 20000
Q5. Register for Contracts and Arrangements entered into with Related Parties and those in which Director are Interested shall be maintained in Form:?
MBP-1
MBP-2
MBP-3
MBP-4
Q6. Would your answer in the above case differ if instead of land it was shares in a subsidiary company and the Director was a nominee thereto , and such holding in Directors’ name was solely so that the number of members are maintained above Statutory limits
Yes, as the same is explicitly covered in Companies Act,2013
No, as there is no specific distinction made
Q7. Mr. Pro provides tax related advice to the Board of A Ltd which a company with turnover of 5 crores. He does practice also as a Tax consultant. A transaction of leasing of property is sought to be undertaken by the Company with Mr Pro for 1 crore. The Board wants this to be approved by the Company as Mr. Pro is a related party in their estimation. Is the treatment valid?
Yes Mr. Pro is a related party as the BOD is accustomed to Act on his directions
No, Mr. Pro is not a related party as the fields of Tax consultancy and land leasing are not the same even though the BOD acts on his directions
Yes, Mr.Pro is a related party as Tax consulting can be associated with land leasing as ways to evade tax
No, Mr. Pro is a professional and as such not covered under Companies Act as related person on whose orders the BOD acts, since he does so in professional capacity
Q8. A. Ltd sought to contribute to the National Defence Fund an amount at 6 % of the average net profits of 3 years immediately preceding the FY. There is a debate as to who is the proper authority to approve such a resolution. Who is the proper authority?
The BOD
The person or authority exercising powers of the BOD
The Co. in GM
All of these
Q9. A. Ltd purchased lands in the name of the Director who held more than 75 percent of all shares of the Company. The Company virtually belongs to the Director and so the property is held in name of the Director, but bought and paid for by the Company. One member objected to this. What is the position of the Companies Act, 2013 on this issue?
The Company can hold land property in name of any other person without restriction
The company can hold all securities in any other persons name, but land property is prohibited
The company can neither hold land property or securities in any other persons name
The Company can hold all forms of assets in the name of its Executive Directors
Q10. A Ltd. Held shares as a beneficial owner but the shares were in name of the Depository. A register as required by law u/s 187 of Companies Act 2013 to enumerate details of such holdings was not maintained. What are the penal provisions for the same?
Fine: 25000-25 lakh
Fine: 25000- 5 lakh
Fine: 25000- 1 lakh
Fine: 25000-50000
Q11. Mr. Good a Director of A. Ltd. Has developed an interest in a previously approved contract which at the time of approval he was not interested in. The Director is of the opinion that he is not liable to any further reporting duty since he has disclosed interest at the time of original approval. But the BOD takes a contrary view. Who is correct?
Q12. What shall be the penal provisions attracted by the defaulting Company in Q No 92
Fine: 1-5 Lakhs
Fine: 5-25 Lakhs
Fine: 1 Lakh
No penalty
Q13. What form is prescribed under Rule 9 of Companies (Meetings of Board and its Powers) Rules, 2014 for disclosure of interest of Directors and their shareholding?
MBP-1
MBP-2
MBP-3
MBP-4
Q14. Mr. Executive a Director of A Ltd. was appointed to that Directorship in July 2017. At the time the flaw in the appointment procedure was not noticed. Mr. Executive voted in many resolutions. In September the auditors brought to the notice of the BOD the flaw in appointment. The BOD were of the opinion that the resolutions to which Mr. Executive had assented shall be invalid by the fact that Mr. Executive was himself invalidly appointed. Is the view off the BOD correct?
Yes, as per the Companies Act, 2013 all resolutions assented to by a Director whose appointment was invalid shall stand void
No, as per the Companies Act, 2013, the discovery of any flaw in the appointment of Director shall not repudiate the validity of resolutions made until such flaw was noticed
Yes, BOD is correct however a Company in GM can ratify the same and validate such decisions if it chooses
No, BOD is incorrect as the wrongfully appointed Director shall be required to make good the losses if any, but all resolutions shall stand
Q15. In the above case, what shall be the punishment labelled onto the defaulting officers of the company?
Imprisonment : upto 1 year. Fine: 5x the amount
Imprisonment: upto 6 months. Fine: 5x the amount
Imprisonment: upto 2 years. Fine: 10x the amount
Imprisonment: upto 1 year. Fine: 10x the amount
Q16. A. Ltd made a contribution of Rs 100000/- to political party but did not follow the Sec 182 of Companies Act 2013. What shall be the punishment for such contravention imposed on the company?
5x the amount
10x the amount
15x the amount
No penalty on the Co.
Q17. Mr. A a Director purchased FloorTiles from the Marble Floor Ltd. He holds Directorship in Marble Floor Ltd. The company extended credit to the Director which was not a policy of the Company. The Auditors raised question saying that this was not permitted in the Companies Act. Which of the following is correct
Q18. Mr. A a member of A Ltd wanted to inspect the contract of service / memorandum of terms of appointment of the employment of M.D. / W.T.D of A Ltd. He was informed that such a record was not maintained. What are the penal provisions applicable to the Company
Fine: 25000
Fine: 50000
Fine:75000
Fine: 100000
Q19. A. Ltd. Made contribution to political parties as follows: 1. Flower Hand Broom(FHB) Party Rs. 100000/- 2. Advertisement in the ‘Socialist’ a pamphlet being issued at rallies by FHB Party Rs 10000/-. 3. Advertisement in ‘Social Soldier’ a brochure chronicling left-leaning seminars, printed by Mr. Leftist, whose philosophies glorify FHB Party . Rs 5000/-. The P&L discloses the Contribution to political parties u/s 182 as Rs 100000/- and Advertisement as 15000/- . Is the disclosure in line with Sec 182 of Companies Act?
Yes, as only direct contributions to political parties are covered in Sec 182
No, as the Contribution in 1. and 2. above are covered in Sec 182 so amount shall be 110000/-
No, as the Contribution in 1. 2. and 3. above are covered in Sec 182 so amount shall be 115000/-
No, as all the amount shall be mandatorily classified as Advertisement Expenditure as stipulated by Companies Act, 2013
Q20. What is the position in law of resolutions (if any) voted upon by the aforesaid Director in Q No 88 after the flaw was notified to the BOD?
Those resolutions shall stand as the flaw is presumed to have been ignored
The resolutions passed shall not stand as the Companies Act explicitly states so
The Co.at a GM convened within 3 months shall ratify the same
The resolutions shall be studied by expert committee of the BOD of which such Director shall not be a part