Section140
The Companies Act, 2013

Removal, resignation of auditor and giving of special notice

In force From 01 Apr 2014 Act 18 of 2013 As on 15 Oct 2026

Act 18 of 2013 Ministry Corporate Affairs Enacted 29 Aug 2013 In force 01 Apr 2014 Instruments 7

Section 140 of the Companies Act, 2013 deals with removal, resignation of auditor and giving of special notice. The auditor appointed under section 139 may be removed from his office before the expiry of his term only by a special resolution of the company, after obtaining the previous approval of the Central Government in that behalf in the prescribed manner: Provided that before taking any action under this The Act came into force on 01 Apr 2014.

(1) The auditor appointed under section 139 may be removed from his office before the expiry of his term only by a special resolution of the company, after obtaining the previous approval of the Central Government in that behalf in the prescribed manner:

Provided that before taking any action under this sub-section, the auditor concerned shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

(2) The auditor who has resigned from the company shall file within a period of thirty days from the date of resignation, a statement in the prescribed form with the company and the Registrar, and in case of companies referred to in sub-section (5) of section 139, the auditor shall also file such statement with the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India, indicating the reasons and other facts as may be relevant with regard to his resignation.

1[(3) If the auditor does not comply with the provisions of sub-section (2), he or it shall be liable to a penalty of fifty thousand rupees or an amount equal to the remuneration of the auditor, whichever is less, and in case of continuing failure, with a further penalty of five hundred rupees for each day after the first during which such failure continues, subject to a maximum of 2 [two lakh rupees].]

(4) (i) Special notice shall be required for a resolution at an annual general meeting appointing as auditor a person other than a retiring auditor, or providing expressly that a retiring auditor shall not be reappointed, except where the retiring auditor has completed a consecutive tenure of five years or, as the case may be, ten years, as provided under sub-section (2) of section 139.

(ii) On receipt of notice of such a resolution, the company shall forthwith send a copy thereof to the retiring auditor.

(iii) Where notice is given of such a resolution and the retiring auditor makes with respect thereto representation in writing to the company (not exceeding a reasonable length) and requests its notification to members of the company, the company shall, unless the representation is received by it too late for it to do so,--

(a) in any notice of the resolution given to members of the company, state the fact of the representation having been made; and

(b) send a copy of the representation to every member of the company to whom notice of the meeting is sent, whether before or after the receipt of the representation by the company,

and if a copy of the representation is not sent as aforesaid because it was received too late or because of the companys default, the auditor may (without prejudice to his right to be heard orally) require that the representation shall be read out at the meeting:

Provided that if a copy of representation is not sent as aforesaid, a copy thereof shall be filed with the Registrar:

Provided further that if the Tribunal is satisfied on an application either of the company or of any other aggrieved person that the rights conferred by this sub-section are being abused by the auditor, then, the copy of the representation may not be sent and the representation need not be read out at the meeting.

(5) Without prejudice to any action under the provisions of this Act or any other law for the time being in force, the Tribunal either suo motu or on an application made to it by the Central Government or by any person concerned, if it is satisfied that the auditor of a company has, whether directly or indirectly, acted in a fraudulent manner or abetted or colluded in any fraud by, or in relation to, the company or its directors or officers, it may, by order, direct the company to change its auditors:

Provided that if the application is made by the Central Government and the Tribunal is satisfied that any change of the auditor is required, it shall within fifteen days of receipt of such application, make an order that he shall not function as an auditor and the Central Government may appoint another auditor in his place:

Provided further that an auditor, whether individual or firm, against whom final order has been passed by the Tribunal under this section shall not be eligible to be appointed as an auditor of any company for a period of five years from the date of passing of the order and the auditor shall also be liable for action under section 447.

Explanation I.-- It is hereby clarified that the case of a firm, the liability shall be of the firm and that of every partner or partners who acted in a fraudulent manner or abetted or colluded in any fraud by, or in relation to, the company or its director or officers.

Explanation II.-- For the purposes of this Chapter the word "auditor" includes a firm of auditors.

Section 140, The Companies Act, 2013 (Act 18 of 2013).

Cross-references

Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

  1. Deloitte Haskins and Sells LLP & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

    High Court 21 Apr 2020 Persuasive (High Court) Cr. WP 4144/2019 & connected (incl. WP 5023/2019 Deloitte; WP 4145/2019 BSR) — Final Order 21.04.2020 (Bombay HC — B.P. Dharmadhikari CJ & Nitin R. Borkar J.)

    Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

    DATE VERIFIED Final Order 21.04.2020 (order-22.pdf): Bombay HC held Companies Act s.140(5) is not unconstitutional (Art. 14/21 challenge rejected) but held NCLT company petition by MCA against auditors who had already resigned/exited was not maintainable under s.140(5); quashed related SFIO prosecution directions under s.212(14) in connected petitions. (Note: SC later reversed parts of the HC approach in other CNRs whose leading PDFs remained wrong-doc — teach this HC isolate carefully.)

    On this section: s.140 Removal/resignation of auditor — constitutional validity of s.140(5) fraud-removal jurisdiction; maintainability against resigned auditors.

    Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.

Judgments citing this section

These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.

  1. Supreme Court of India 03 May 2023 SCIN010316862021

    … SHAH, J. Appeals under consideration: 1. This batch of Criminal Appeals/Civil Appeals raise common question(s) of law pertaining to the interpretation of Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 2013') and the Investigation Report dated 28.05.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN SFIO Report') in respect of IL&FS Financial Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN'). 1.1 Criminal Appeal Nos. 2305-2307/2022, Criminal …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

  2. Supreme Court of India 03 May 2023 SCIN010317532021

    … SHAH, J. Appeals under consideration: 1. This batch of Criminal Appeals/Civil Appeals raise common question(s) of law pertaining to the interpretation of Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 2013') and the Investigation Report dated 28.05.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN SFIO Report') in respect of IL&FS Financial Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN'). 1.1 Criminal Appeal Nos. 2305-2307/2022, Criminal …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

  3. Supreme Court of India 03 May 2023 SCIN010317492021

    … SHAH, J. Appeals under consideration: 1. This batch of Criminal Appeals/Civil Appeals raise common question(s) of law pertaining to the interpretation of Section 140(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 2013') and the Investigation Report dated 28.05.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN SFIO Report') in respect of IL&FS Financial Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'IFIN'). 1.1 Criminal Appeal Nos. 2305-2307/2022, Criminal …

    Read this order on eCourtsIndia

Made under this section, and citing it

7 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.

All subordinate legislation

Questions about Section 140

What have the courts held on Section 140 of the Companies Act?

Deloitte Haskins and Sells LLP & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (21 Apr 2020) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.140 Removal/resignation of auditor — constitutional validity of s.140(5) fraud-removal jurisdiction; maintainability against resigned auditors.

How do I find court cases under Section 140 of the Companies Act?

In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Companies Act 140, section 140 Companies Act, section 140 of the Companies Act. People searching for it also type companies act 140 4 and companies act 2013 section 140. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Deloitte Haskins and Sells LLP & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (21 Apr 2020).

What should I read with Section 140 of the Companies Act, and has it changed?

Its own text turns on section 139 (Appointment of auditors), section 447 (Punishment for fraud), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 7 instruments name it without being made under it, most recently Companies (Audit and Auditors) Amendment Rules, 2018 (2018), then Companies (Audit and Auditors) Amendment Rules, 2018 (2018).

When did Section 140 of the Companies Act come into force?

Section 140 of the Companies Act, cited as Companies Act 140, came into force on 01 Apr 2014, having been enacted on 29 Aug 2013. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.

Other sections of this Act

Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.