ROC & Company Law
CCFS-2026 Extended to 15 September 2026: The Last Window to Clear ROC Defaults at 10% Additional Fees
What actually happened on 31 August
Nothing about the Scheme changed except the calendar. The circular records that representations were received from stakeholders, and extends validity to 15 September 2026 with all other terms and conditions unchanged. That is the whole of it. The more useful question is what this is the third extension of, and how much runway is genuinely left.
| Circular | Date | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| General Circular No. 01/2026 | 24 February 2026 | Notifies CCFS-2026 under Section 460 read with Section 403 of the Companies Act, 2013. Scheme operative from 15 April 2026 to 15 July 2026. |
| MCA FAQs | 22 April 2026 | Clarificatory FAQs issued on the working of the Scheme. |
| General Circular No. 03/2026 | 8 July 2026 | Extends the Scheme to 31 August 2026, the MCA-21 data centre restoration having eaten into the original window. |
| General Circular No. 04/2026 | 31 August 2026 | Extends the Scheme to 15 September 2026 on stakeholder representations. All other terms unchanged. |
Two extensions in two months, each shorter than the last, is not the shape of a scheme that keeps getting renewed. It is the shape of one being closed out. Plan for 15 September as the real date.
What the 90% concession is actually worth
This is where most companies underestimate their own exposure. Since 1 July 2018 the additional fee on delayed annual filings has been a flat ₹100 per day, per form, with no upper limit. There is no ceiling of twelve times the normal fee any more. The number compounds quietly for years, and directors usually discover its size only when someone finally opens the MCA portal to file.
Take a small private company that stopped filing after FY 2018-19 — a common Delhi NCR pattern where a business went quiet but the company was never formally closed. AOC-4 and MGT-7 are pending for six financial years. Using the standard statutory due dates and computing to 15 September 2026:
| Financial year | AOC-4 — days delayed | MGT-7 — days delayed | Additional fee at ₹100/day | Payable under CCFS-2026 (10%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY 2019-20 | 2,146 | 2,116 | ₹4,26,200 | ₹42,620 |
| FY 2020-21 | 1,781 | 1,751 | ₹3,53,200 | ₹35,320 |
| FY 2021-22 | 1,416 | 1,386 | ₹2,80,200 | ₹28,020 |
| FY 2022-23 | 1,051 | 1,021 | ₹2,07,200 | ₹20,720 |
| FY 2023-24 | 685 | 655 | ₹1,34,000 | ₹13,400 |
| FY 2024-25 | 320 | 290 | ₹61,000 | ₹6,100 |
| Total | ₹14,61,800 | ₹1,46,180 |
The saving is roughly ₹13.16 lakh, and it expires on 15 September. Even a company one year behind moves from about ₹61,000 to about ₹6,100. The numbers above assume AOC-4 due 30 October and MGT-7 due 29 November each year, ignore year-specific MCA relaxations, and cover only the additional fee — normal filing fees (₹200 to ₹600 per form, by authorised share capital slab) are payable in full, as is professional certification where required. Run your own dates before deciding; the direction of the answer, however, does not change.
Forms covered — and the ones people wrongly assume are covered
CCFS-2026 is an annual filing scheme. That boundary is where most of the disappointment happens: a company clears its AOC-4 and MGT-7 backlog cheaply, then discovers that the INC-20A it never filed, or the DIR-12 for a director who resigned in 2021, still costs full freight.
Covered by the Scheme
| E-form | Act | What it is |
|---|---|---|
| MGT-7 | 2013 | Annual return |
| MGT-7A | 2013 | Annual return — OPC and small companies |
| AOC-4 | 2013 | Financial statements |
| AOC-4 CFS | 2013 | Consolidated financial statements |
| AOC-4 NBFC (Ind AS) | 2013 | Financial statements — NBFCs reporting under Ind AS |
| AOC-4 CFS NBFC (Ind AS) | 2013 | Consolidated financial statements — NBFCs under Ind AS |
| AOC-4 XBRL | 2013 | Financial statements in XBRL format |
| ADT-1 | 2013 | Intimation of auditor’s appointment |
| FC-3 | 2013 | Annual accounts — foreign company |
| FC-4 | 2013 | Annual return — foreign company |
| Form 20B, 21A | 1956 | Annual returns |
| Form 23AC, 23ACA | 1956 | Balance sheet and profit & loss account |
| Form 23AC-XBRL, 23ACA-XBRL | 1956 | Balance sheet and P&L in XBRL format |
| Form 66 | 1956 | Compliance certificate |
| Form 23B | 1956 | Auditor’s intimation of appointment |
Not covered — full additional fees still apply
| E-form | What it is |
|---|---|
| INC-20A | Declaration of commencement of business |
| PAS-3 | Return of allotment of shares |
| SH-7 | Alteration of share capital |
| DIR-12 | Appointment, resignation or change of directors |
| CHG-1, CHG-4 | Creation, modification and satisfaction of charges |
| MGT-14 | Filing of resolutions and agreements |
| DIR-3 KYC | Annual KYC of directors — a DIN-level compliance with its own fee regime |
| INC-22A (ACTIVE) | Registered office tagging and verification |
| LLP Form 8, Form 11 | LLP statement of accounts and annual return — governed by the LLP Act, 2008, outside this Scheme |
ADT-1 being inside the Scheme is quietly the most useful item on the list. A company that never filed the auditor's appointment cannot cleanly file AOC-4 for those years, because the audit report is signed by an auditor whose appointment was never intimated. Fixing ADT-1 at 10% additional fee, in the same window, is what makes the rest of the sequence defensible.
The immunity — read this before assuming you are safe
Reduced fees and immunity are two different benefits, and the second one has conditions the first does not. The Scheme distinguishes between the two annual-filing defaults that carry adjudication exposure and everything else.
Sections 92 and 137 — annual return and financial statements
The proviso to Section 454(3) allows an adjudicating officer to conclude proceedings without penalty where the default is rectified. Applied to CCFS-2026:
- Filed before any adjudication notice is issued — proceedings are concluded; no penalty leviable.
- Filed within 30 days of an adjudication notice — same result; the notice does not by itself end the opportunity.
- The 30 days have expired, or an adjudication order has already been passed — no immunity. The penalty already imposed remains payable, and paying the reduced additional fee does not erase it.
ADT-1, FC-3, FC-4 and the 1956 Act forms
Immunity from prospective penal action for the delayed filing applies only where both conditions hold: the form is filed under the Scheme, and no prosecution had been launched and no show cause notice issued before that filing.
One structural improvement over CFSS-2020 deserves note: there is no separate immunity application. Filing the overdue form is itself the act of availing the Scheme. Nobody has to remember to file an e-form CFSS-2020 six months later, which is how a fair number of 2020 immunity claims were lost.
Who cannot use the Scheme
Five categories are outside CCFS-2026:
- Companies against which the Registrar has already initiated final notice for striking off under Section 248.
- Companies that have themselves already applied for strike-off.
- Companies that had already applied for dormant status before the Scheme.
- Companies dissolved under a scheme of amalgamation.
- Vanishing companies.
Note what the first exclusion does not say. Being in default, or being a strike-off candidate, is not the exclusion — the exclusion bites once the Registrar has issued the final notice. If your company has received STK-1 or STK-5 correspondence, check the stage before assuming the Scheme is available; if it has not, the Scheme is available and the clock is the only obstacle.
The two exit routes — often the better answer
Not every defaulting company should be brought current. For a company that has not traded in years and has no plan to, spending on six years of audits to file forms for a shell is bad economics. The Scheme prices both exits deliberately low:
| Route | Form | Fee | Section | Suits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dormant status | MSC-1 | 50% of normal fee | Sec 455 | A company being parked — a name, a licence, an asset or an idea to be revived later. Keeps the entity alive on a minimal compliance footing (MSC-3 annually). |
| Strike-off | STK-2 | 25% of applicable fee | STK Rules, 2016 | A company that is finished. No liabilities, nothing to preserve, directors who want the compliance tail to stop permanently. |
Both routes have their own preconditions — a strike-off applicant needs nil liabilities and, in practice, a clean enough filing position for the Registrar to remove the name; dormancy under Section 455 needs a special resolution and the statutory conditions to be met. The concessional fee reduces the cost of the exit, not its requirements. Our note on the ROC annual compliance calendar sets out what the ongoing obligation looks like if you keep the company alive instead.
What happens on 16 September
The Scheme does not simply lapse quietly. Its closing paragraph directs Registrars of Companies to take necessary action under the Act against companies that have not availed it and are in default. Read alongside the standing provisions, the exposure after the window is:
- Additional fees revert to ₹100 per day, per form, uncapped — and continue to accrue daily.
- Adjudication under Section 454 for Section 92 and Section 137 defaults, with penalties on the company and on every officer in default.
- Suo motu strike-off under Section 248, which removes the company without settling the directors' position.
- Director disqualification under Section 164(2)(a) where financial statements or annual returns have not been filed for three consecutive financial years — a five-year disqualification that attaches to the individual across all companies, not merely the defaulting one. This is the consequence directors consistently underrate, because it survives the company.
Can a backlog actually be cleared in the days remaining?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no, and the honest answer depends entirely on the state of the books rather than on the deadline. The filings are the last step of a chain, not the first:
- Books closed and financials prepared for each pending year.
- Auditor validly in place — where the appointment was never intimated, ADT-1 comes first (and it is inside the Scheme).
- Audit reports signed for each year, in sequence, with prior-year comparatives that tie.
- Board approval and AGM for each year, with proper minutes; the AGM dates drive the filing dates.
- File AOC-4, then MGT-7 / MGT-7A, year by year, oldest first — the portal will not let you leapfrog.
- Pay normal fee plus 10% of the additional fee and preserve the challans.
Where books are broadly complete, two to three years is realistic in the time left. Where a company has not been audited since 2019, attempting all six years and completing none is the worst outcome — filing whatever can validly be filed by 15 September at least stops the oldest and most expensive years from re-pricing at full rate. And leave a buffer: MCA-21 congestion in the final 72 hours of an amnesty window is entirely predictable, and this Scheme has already lost time once to a data centre restoration.
Five mistakes we are seeing this fortnight
- Assuming full waiver. That was CFSS-2020. Budget the 10% plus normal fees plus professional cost, then decide.
- Ignoring an adjudication notice already received. The 30-day window inside that notice is the binding constraint, not 15 September.
- Filing out of order. ADT-1 before AOC-4 where the auditor appointment was never intimated; oldest year first thereafter.
- Reviving a company that should be closed. Six audits to keep a dead shell alive, when STK-2 at 25% was sitting on the same page.
- Forgetting the director. The company can be brought current and the individual can still be caught by Section 164(2) for the three years already elapsed — check DIN status alongside the company's filing history.
How Startup Advisory helps
From our Saket office we run CCFS-2026 clean-ups for private limited companies, OPCs and Section 8 companies across Delhi NCR: a same-day exposure computation from the MCA master data and filing history, a call on whether to revive, park under MSC-1 or close under STK-2, and then the reconstruction — catch-up bookkeeping, audit coordination, AGM and board documentation, and the filings themselves in the right sequence. Where an adjudication notice is already in play we deal with that clock separately and first.
Our Virtual CFO and bookkeeping teams do the catch-up work that makes the filings possible, and company registration clients are put on a compliance calendar from day one so this conversation never happens. Related reading: the ROC annual compliance calendar for Delhi companies, Section 8 company annual compliance and the statutory audit preparation checklist.
If you are holding a default and are not sure whether it is worth clearing, send us the CIN — the first thing you will get back is the number, not a pitch. Call 9311972982.
This article is general information, not legal or professional advice. It is based on MCA General Circular No. 01/2026 dated 24 February 2026 and the extension circulars No. 03/2026 and No. 04/2026, together with the MCA FAQs of 22 April 2026. Fee figures are indicative and computed on standard statutory due dates; verify the operative circular text on mca.gov.in and your own filing history before acting.
