Shakti Polytarp discloses years of delayed statutory filings

Shakti Polytarp Limited disclosed delayed filings under goods and services tax, tax deduction, employee-benefit and Companies Act requirements over several financial years, including an Employees’ State Insurance Corporation filing delayed by 292 days. Shakti Polytarp attributed the delays primarily to the absence of dedicated compliance staff and weaknesses in internal controls, while stating routine late fees and interest were paid.

Why did Shakti Polytarp disclose delayed statutory filings?

Shakti Polytarp said the principal reasons for the delayed GST, income-tax and employee-benefit filings were the absence of a dedicated officer and lags and weaknesses in internal controls. The disclosed record spans employee-benefit filings beginning in financial year 2019-20, GST annual returns for financial year 2020-21, tax deducted at source returns for financial year 2021-22, and Companies Act filings beginning in financial year 2018-19.

For Companies Act compliance, Shakti Polytarp also cited its earlier small size and limited resources, which it said caused some requirements to be inadvertently overlooked. The company said it appointed Jitendra Kumar Gupta as company secretary and compliance officer on April 1, 2026, to rectify non-compliance and delayed filings. This appointment directly addresses the company’s stated lack of dedicated compliance capacity.

Shakti Polytarp has also disclosed training and development sessions for staff, collaboration with tax consultants, legal advisers or other consultants where required, and preparation of a compliance calendar. These measures must operate effectively across GST, income tax, employee-benefit and corporate filing deadlines for the pattern of delays to stop. The company nevertheless said it cannot assure that similar delays will not recur, including where circumstances are beyond its control.

How long were Shakti Polytarp’s GST and tax filing delays?

Shakti Polytarp’s disclosed GST and tax deducted at source delays were shorter than its employee-benefit delays, with the longest listed GST annual-return delay at 32 days and the longest tax deducted at source delay at 21 days. Tax deducted at source, or TDS, is tax withheld by a payer from specified payments and reported through periodic returns.

The GST record lists one-day delays for return type 1 for April, May and June 2022 and September 2023. A return type 3B for December 2024 was filed on January 22, 2025, two days after the January 20, 2025 due date. The GSTR-9 annual return and GSTR-9C reconciliation statement for financial year 2020-21 were each filed on March 29, 2022, 32 days after their February 28, 2022 due date.

The TDS record lists a 21-day delay for Form 26Q for January to March 2022, filed on June 21, 2022 against a May 31, 2022 deadline. Form 27EQ, which applies to tax collected at source reporting, was filed 14 days late for April to June 2021 and two days late for January to March 2022. The comparison shows that disclosed GST and withholding-tax delays were measured in days or weeks, unlike several employee-benefit cases measured in months.

What do the employee-benefit filing delays show?

Shakti Polytarp’s longest disclosed delay was 292 days for an Employees’ State Insurance Corporation, or ESIC, filing for November 2019. That filing was due on December 15, 2019 and filed on October 2, 2020. ESIC is the statutory employee-insurance framework referenced in the company’s disclosure.

The ESIC delays were concentrated in financial years 2019-20 through 2021-22. Listed examples include 200 days for October 2019, 236 days for January 2020 and 238 days for March 2020. In financial year 2022-23, the listed ESIC delays fell to between two and five days, while the listed May and June 2023 delays were nine and 13 days. The change in listed durations indicates that the later disclosed ESIC cases were shorter, though it does not establish future compliance.

Employees’ Provident Fund, or EPF, filings also show substantial earlier delays. Shakti Polytarp reported a 204-day delay for April 2019, followed by 188 days for May 2019 and 161 days for June 2019. Later listed EPF delays included one to five days in financial year 2022-23, two days for April 2023 and May 2024, and two days for August 2025.

As of June 30, 2026, Shakti Polytarp reported 114 employees. Its contribution table stated that five employees were covered under EPF and 81 under ESIC, with Rs 8,086 paid under EPF and Rs 49,819 under ESIC. The company said 109 employees were outside the EPF salary threshold and 33 were outside the ESIC threshold; however, a separate risk factor states that 99 employees were registered with ESI, creating a difference between the two ESI figures.

How extensive were Shakti Polytarp’s Companies Act filing delays?

Shakti Polytarp disclosed 21 delayed filings under the Companies Act, 2013, from financial year 2018-19 through financial year 2025-26. The longest was a 239-day delay for Form MGT-14 in financial year 2023-24, filed on November 27, 2024 against an April 2, 2024 due date. MGT-14 is used to file specified resolutions and agreements with the Registrar of Companies.

The delayed forms included CHG-1 and CHG-4, concerning creation and satisfaction of charges, as well as DPT-3, PAS-6, ADT-1 and MR-1. Before the 239-day MGT-14 case, the longest listed delay was 62 days for CHG-1 in financial year 2022-23. The six listed financial year 2024-25 delays ranged from eight days for PAS-6 to 50 days for MGT-14.

The Companies Act table includes four financial year 2025-26 entries, but their filing dates are January 31, February 5, March 5 and January 15, 2026. Those dates precede the April 1, 2026 appointment of the company secretary and compliance officer, so the disclosed table does not provide a post-appointment record on which to assess the new arrangement. M/s Kamesh Purviya & Co., Practicing Company Secretaries, certified the table on July 16, 2026.

What legal exposure and funding position did Shakti Polytarp state?

Shakti Polytarp said the GST, Income Tax Act, ESIC and EPF delays require no adjudication, compounding or regularisation beyond routine late fees and interest, which it said were duly paid. It also said no notices, adjudication proceedings or prosecutions were pending or initiated against the company as of the red herring prospectus date under those laws.

For the Companies Act delays, Shakti Polytarp said no adjudication, compounding or regularisation was required and no related proceeding was pending or contemplated as of the red herring prospectus date. The company nevertheless disclosed that delayed filings may attract penalties or prosecution against it and its directors, and that future discrepancies could lead to penal consequences.

Shakti Polytarp said amounts payable for routine late fees, interest, past non-compliance, adjudication or penalties would not be paid or funded from the general corporate purpose portion of the issue’s net proceeds. The disclosure does not quantify a future liability because the company reports no pending proceeding requiring adjudication. Its financial exposure would change if a future notice, legal action, fine or penalty arises from a recurrence.

Conclusion

Shakti Polytarp’s disclosed filing record identifies a multi-year process and staffing issue across tax, employee-benefit and corporate-law requirements. The most extended delays were in ESIC and EPF filings, at 292 days and 204 days respectively, while the 239-day MGT-14 case shows that the control issue also affected Companies Act compliance.

The next disclosed point to watch is whether the April 1, 2026 compliance-officer appointment, staff training, adviser support and compliance calendar result in timely future filings. Shakti Polytarp has stated that it is addressing the shortcomings, but has also stated that it cannot assure that delays will not recur.