Nuvoco Vistas Corporation logo

Nuvoco Vistas Corporation MD, chairman, board of directors and AGM

NSE: NUVOCOBSE: 543334Cement & Cement ProductsSmall Cap

Last close ₹330.60down ₹7.10 (2.10%)BSE ₹330.60

Share price at the NSE close on 23 Oct 2026. Previous close ₹337.70.

52-week range of traded prices to 23 Oct 2026
₹276.25Low, 24 Mar 2026₹430.20High, 29 Oct 2025
Market cap
₹11,808 Cr513th largest listed
P/E
28.5
P/E without one-offs
25.5
P/B
1.2
Dividend yield
Nonein the last 12 months
ROE
4.4%
ROE without one-offs
4.9%
ROCE
6.6%
Debt to equity
0.50
Volume, NSE
7,38,67530.8% delivered

Nuvoco Vistas Corporation board of directors

At the end of the quarter to Jun 2026, as the company filed it; changes since are in its announcements.Their trades in its shares

  • ChairpersonHIREN KARSANBHAI PATELRelated to the promoter
  • Managing directorJAYAKUMAR KRISHNASWAMY
  • Company Secretary and Compliance OfficerShruta Sanghavi

6 directors3 independent1 executive2 non-executive

  • HIREN KARSANBHAI PATEL · ChairpersonNon-executive · joined Nov 2017 · 2 listed boards
  • KAUSHIKBHAI N PATELNon-executive · joined Nov 2017 · 2 listed boards · 1 as independent · 4 committee seats, 3 as chair
  • BHAVNA GAUTAM DOSHIIndependent · joined Jan 2017 · reappointed Jan 2022 · 113 months as independent · 5 listed boards · 5 as independent · 6 committee seats, 2 as chair
  • ACHAL ANIL BAKERIIndependent · joined Apr 2021 · reappointed Apr 2024 · 62 months as independent · 3 listed boards · 2 as independent · 1 committee seat
  • SHISHIR BABUBHAI DESAIIndependent · joined Aug 2023 · reappointed Aug 2023 · 34 months as independent · 2 listed boards · 2 as independent · 1 committee seat
  • JAYAKUMAR KRISHNASWAMY · Managing directorExecutive · joined Sep 2018 · reappointed Sep 2023 · 1 listed board · 5 committee seats

An independent director has no business or family tie to the company, its promoters or its managers beyond the seat. Listed boards counts the boards of listed companies the director sits on, this one included, and "as independent" how many of those seats are independent ones. Committee seats are audit and stakeholder committee seats across those companies. Months as independent is filed for independent directors only, whose terms the rules cap. Disqualified is the company's own mark that a director may not serve under company law.

Committees and meetings

Who sits on each, and how often they met.Board meeting notices and outcomes

  • Board

    • 14 Apr 20266 of 6 present3 independent · 1 day in between
    • 12 Apr 20266 of 6 present3 independent · 24 days in between
    • 18 Mar 20266 of 6 present3 independent · 61 days in between
    • 15 Jan 20266 of 6 present3 independent

  • Audit Committee

    Chair BHAVNA GAUTAM DOSHI

    SHISHIR BABUBHAI DESAI, KAUSHIKBHAI N PATEL

    • 14 Apr 20263 of 3 present2 independent · 26 days in between
    • 18 Mar 20263 of 3 present2 independent · 61 days in between
    • 15 Jan 20263 of 3 present2 independent

  • Nomination and remuneration committee

    Chair BHAVNA GAUTAM DOSHI

    SHISHIR BABUBHAI DESAI, KAUSHIKBHAI N PATEL

    • 14 Apr 20263 of 3 present2 independent

  • Stakeholders Relationship Committee

    Chair KAUSHIKBHAI N PATEL

    JAYAKUMAR KRISHNASWAMY, ACHAL ANIL BAKERI

    • 15 Jan 20263 of 3 present1 independent

  • Risk Management Committee

    Chair KAUSHIKBHAI N PATEL

    BHAVNA GAUTAM DOSHI, JAYAKUMAR KRISHNASWAMY, MANEESH AGRAWAL

    • 15 Jan 20263 of 3 present1 independent

  • Corporate Social Responsibility Committee

    Chair BHAVNA GAUTAM DOSHI

    KAUSHIKBHAI N PATEL, JAYAKUMAR KRISHNASWAMY

    • 14 Apr 20263 of 3 present1 independent · 88 days in between

Meetings in the quarter filed and the one before it. The days in between are as the company files them, neither meeting's day counted; the rules allow at most 120. A quorum is the least number of members who must attend for the meeting to decide anything.

Statutory auditor

Named in the results for the quarter to Mar 2026.

  • M S K A and Associates LLPPeer-review certificate valid to Jul 2027
1 earlier auditor
  • M S K A & AssociatesNamed in the filing for the quarter to Mar 2025

A statutory auditor checks the company's accounts and signs its results. Peer review is the accountants' institute's check of an audit firm's own work, which a listed company's auditor must hold a valid certificate of.

Nuvoco Vistas Corporation AGM and shareholder votes

Each resolution, how the votes went, and how institutions voted apart from the promoters. A postal ballot is a vote by post or online, held without a meeting.Nuvoco Vistas Corporation share news and announcements

Annual general meeting, 31 Aug 2026

1,85,856 shareholders on the register on 24 Aug 2026; present: 2 promoters and 64 others; votes counted by Ms. Jigyasa N. Ved / M/s. Parikh & Associates.The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. To receive, consider and adopt the: a) Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2026 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; and b) Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2026 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 21.56%

    Turnout: all 92.44% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 91.33% · other public 0.28%

  2. To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), Non-Executive Director, who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    Ordinary
    98.33% for1.67% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 7.51% · other public 23.62%

    Turnout: all 92.49% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 91.55% · other public 0.28%

  3. Appointment of M/s. Walker Chandiok & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company in casual vacancy.
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 22.00%

    Turnout: all 92.49% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 91.55% · other public 0.28%

  4. Appointment of M/s. Walker Chandiok & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company, for a term of 5 (five) consecutive years.
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 22.50%

    Turnout: all 92.49% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 91.55% · other public 0.28%

  5. Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2026-27.
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 22.47%

    Turnout: all 92.49% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 91.55% · other public 0.28%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Annual general meeting, 25 Jul 2025, 4 resolutions

1,91,965 shareholders on the register on 18 Jul 2025; present: 2 promoters and 42 others; votes counted by Ms. Jigyasa N. Ved / M/s. Parikh & Associates.The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. To receive, consider and adopt the: a. Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2025 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; and b. Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2025, together with the Report of Auditors thereonMoreLess
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 9.37%

    Turnout: all 93.96% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 95.26% · other public 0.36%

  2. To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Kaushikbhai Patel (DIN: 00145086), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment
    Ordinary
    99.89% for0.11% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.45% · other public 13.16%

    Turnout: all 93.96% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 95.28% · other public 0.35%

  3. Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2025-26
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 10.27%

    Turnout: all 93.96% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 95.28% · other public 0.35%

  4. Appointment of M/s. Parikh & Associate, Practising Company Secretaries as the Secretarial Auditors of the Company
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 8.95%

    Turnout: all 93.96% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 95.28% · other public 0.35%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Annual general meeting, 24 Jul 2024, 3 resolutions

Present: 2 promoters and 54 others.The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. To receive, consider and adopt:na.the Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2024 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnb.the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2024 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 6.76%

    Turnout: all 93.04% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 96.93% · other public 0.19%

  2. To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    Ordinary
    99.97% for0.03% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.11% · other public 10.96%

    Turnout: all 93.04% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 96.93% · other public 0.19%

  3. Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2024-25.
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 8.42%

    Turnout: all 93.04% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 96.93% · other public 0.19%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Postal ballot, 1 Apr 2024, 1 resolution

The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. Reappointment of Mr. Achal Bakeri (DIN: 00397573) as an Independent Director of the Company
    Special
    99.75% for0.25% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 1.04% · other public 20.02%

    Turnout: all 92.96% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 94.27% · other public 0.66%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Postal ballot, 17 Oct 2023, 1 resolution

The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. Appointment of Mr.Shishir Desai (DIN:01453410) as an Independent Director of the Company
    Special
    99.80% for0.20% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.79% · other public 22.25%

    Turnout: all 94.18% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 96.86% · other public 0.65%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Annual general meeting, 26 Jul 2023, 10 resolutions

Present: 3 promoters and 58 others.The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. To receive, consider and adopt:nna.tthe Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2023 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnnb. the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2023 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 14.75%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  2. To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Kaushikbhai Patel (DIN: 00145086), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    Ordinary
    99.94% for0.06% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.25% · other public 20.01%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  3. Approval for waiver of recovery of excess managerial remuneration paid to Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy, Managing Director (DIN: 02099219) of the Company for the Financial Year 2022-23
    Special
    97.40% for2.60% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 10.80% · other public 34.66%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  4. Approval for payment of remuneration to Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy, Managing Director (DIN: 02099219) of the Company for the period April 1, 2023 to September 16, 2023
    Special
    97.48% for2.52% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 10.49% · other public 22.34%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  5. Approval for payment of remuneration by way of commission to the Non-Executive Directors of the Company for the Financial Year 2022-23.
    Ordinary
    98.17% for1.83% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 7.60% · other public 27.50%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  6. Approval for payment of remuneration by way of commission to the Non-Executive Directors of the Company effective April 1, 2023.
    Special
    94.77% for5.23% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 25.60% · other public 27.33%

    Turnout: all 90.11% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 78.87% · other public 0.15%

  7. Re-appointment of Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy (DIN: 02099219) as Managing Director of the Company
    Special
    96.23% for3.77% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 15.67% · other public 22.63%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  8. Alteration of the Memorandum of Association of the Company
    Special
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 22.45%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  9. Alteration of the Articles of Association of the Company
    Special
    98.60% for1.40% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 5.83% · other public 21.59%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

  10. Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for the Financial Year 2023-24
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 20.51%

    Turnout: all 94.38% · promoters 99.87% · institutions 97.16% · other public 0.15%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Annual general meeting, 5 Aug 2022, 4 resolutions

Present: 6 promoters and 71 others.The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. To receive, consider and adopt:n a) the Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2022 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnb) the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2022 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.nMoreLess
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 0.60%

    Turnout: all 94.06% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 97.58% · other public 5.31%

  2. To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    Ordinary
    99.82% for0.18% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.74% · other public 1.03%

    Turnout: all 94.29% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 98.63% · other public 5.31%

  3. Re-appointment of M/s. M S K A & Associates, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 0.67%

    Turnout: all 94.29% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 98.63% · other public 5.31%

  4. Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2022-23
    Ordinary
    100.00% for0.00% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 0.00% · other public 0.97%

    Turnout: all 94.29% · promoters 100.00% · institutions 98.63% · other public 5.31%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

Postal ballot, 16 Dec 2021, 2 resolutions

The company's voting result (opens in a new tab)

  1. Reappointment of Mr. Berjis Desai (DIN: 00153675) as an Independent Director of the Company
    Special
    98.92% for1.08% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 5.07% · other public 0.93%

    Turnout: all 87.38% · promoters 96.59% · institutions 77.43% · other public 5.34%

  2. Reappointment of Mrs. Bhavna Doshi (DIN: 00400508) as an Independent Director of the Company
    Special
    98.92% for1.08% against

    Against: promoters 0.00% · institutions 5.07% · other public 0.87%

    Turnout: all 87.38% · promoters 96.59% · institutions 77.43% · other public 5.34%

For and against are per cent of the votes cast. Turnout is the votes cast as a per cent of the shares each group holds. Institutions are funds, insurers, banks and foreign investors. An ordinary resolution passes with more than half the votes cast, a special one with at least three quarters.

How mutual funds voted

Fund houses must disclose how they vote at every meeting of a company they hold.Funds that hold it

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 31 Aug 2026, 9 fund houses so far (houses' deadline to file 15 Oct 2026)

  • To receive, consider and adopt the: a) Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2026 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; and b) Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2026 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    9 for0 against
  • To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), Non-Executive Director, who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    9 for0 against
  • Appointment of M/s. Walker Chandiok & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company in casual vacancy.
    9 for0 against
  • Appointment of M/s. Walker Chandiok & Co LLP, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company, for a term of 5 (five) consecutive years.
    9 for0 against
  • Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2026-27.
    9 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 25 Jul 2025, 11 fund houses

  • To receive, consider and adopt the: a. Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2025 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; and b. Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2025, together with the Report of Auditors thereonMoreLess
    11 for0 against
  • To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Kaushikbhai Patel (DIN: 00145086), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment
    11 for0 against
  • Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2025-26
    11 for0 against
  • Appointment of M/s. Parikh & Associate, Practising Company Secretaries as the Secretarial Auditors of the Company
    11 for0 against
6 earlier meetings

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 24 Jul 2024, 14 fund houses

Each resolution counts the houses whose vote was matched to it; the rest are listed last.

  • To receive, consider and adopt:na.the Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2024 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnb.the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2024 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    13 for0 against
  • To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    14 for0 against
  • Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2024-25.
    14 for0 against
1 proposal not matched to one resolution
  • Accept Financial Statements and Statutory Reports
    1 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 1 Apr 2024, 11 fund houses

  • Reappointment of Mr. Achal Bakeri (DIN: 00397573) as an Independent Director of the Company
    11 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 17 Oct 2023, 10 fund houses

  • Appointment of Mr.Shishir Desai (DIN:01453410) as an Independent Director of the Company
    10 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 26 Jul 2023, 9 fund houses

Each resolution counts the houses whose vote was matched to it; the rest are listed last.

  • To receive, consider and adopt:nna.tthe Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2023 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnnb. the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2023 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.MoreLess
    7 for0 against
  • To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Kaushikbhai Patel (DIN: 00145086), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    8 for0 against
  • Approval for waiver of recovery of excess managerial remuneration paid to Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy, Managing Director (DIN: 02099219) of the Company for the Financial Year 2022-23
    8 for0 against
  • Approval for payment of remuneration to Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy, Managing Director (DIN: 02099219) of the Company for the period April 1, 2023 to September 16, 2023
    8 for0 against
  • Approval for payment of remuneration by way of commission to the Non-Executive Directors of the Company for the Financial Year 2022-23.
    Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual Fund, Nippon India Mutual Fund
    • Bandhan Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual FundCompliant with Law. Governance Concern: Commission akin to Sitting Fees.
    • Nippon India Mutual FundCommission akin to sitting fees
    5 for3 against
  • Approval for payment of remuneration by way of commission to the Non-Executive Directors of the Company effective April 1, 2023.
    Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, HDFC Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual Fund, Nippon India Mutual Fund
    • Bandhan Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual FundCompliant with Law. Governance Concern: Perpetual approval. No absolute cap on commission payable.
    • HDFC Mutual FundThe proposed commission approval sought is high
    • Nippon India Mutual FundPerpetual approval, hence not approved
    4 for4 against
  • Re-appointment of Mr. Jayakumar Krishnaswamy (DIN: 02099219) as Managing Director of the Company
    Against HDFC Mutual Fund, Nippon India Mutual Fund
    • HDFC Mutual FundThe proposed remuneration is high considering the size and complexity of the business
    • Nippon India Mutual FundInsufficient information
    6 for2 against
  • Alteration of the Memorandum of Association of the Company
    8 for0 against
  • Alteration of the Articles of Association of the Company
    Against Bandhan Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual Fund, Nippon India Mutual Fund
    • Bandhan Mutual Fund, Motilal Oswal Mutual FundNon-compliant with SEBI LODR Regulation. Article also includes provision to appoint directors nominated by financial institution in other cases which can be done without shareholders’ approval and it can be on non-retiring basis.
    • Nippon India Mutual FundArticle also includes provision to appoint directors nominated by financial institution in other cases which can be done without shareholders’ approval and it can be on non-retiring basis
    6 for3 against
  • Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for the Financial Year 2023-24
    8 for0 against
1 proposal not matched to one resolution
  • Accept Financial Statements and Statutory Reports
    1 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 5 Aug 2022, 11 fund houses

Each resolution counts the houses whose vote was matched to it; the rest are listed last.

  • To receive, consider and adopt:n a) the Audited Standalone Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2022 together with the Reports of the Board of Directors and Auditors thereon; andnb) the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company for the Financial Year ended March 31, 2022 together with the Report of Auditors thereon.nMoreLess
    10 for0 against
  • To appoint a Director in place of Mr. Hiren Patel (DIN: 00145149), who retires by rotation and being eligible, offers himself for re-appointment.
    11 for0 against
  • Re-appointment of M/s. M S K A & Associates, Chartered Accountants, as the Statutory Auditors of the Company
    11 for0 against
  • Ratification of the remuneration of Cost Auditors for FY 2022-23
    10 for0 against
3 proposals not matched to one resolution
  • Accept Consolidated Financial Statements and Statutory Reports
    1 for0 against
  • Accept Standalone Financial Statements and Statutory Reports
    1 for0 against
  • To ratify the remuneration payable to M/s DC Dave & Co Cost Accountants Mumbai (Firm Registration No. 000611) Cost Auditors appointed by the Board of Directors to conduct the audit of the cost records of the company for the financial year ending March 31, 2023.MoreLess
    1 for0 against

Mutual fund votes, meeting of 16 Dec 2021, 8 fund houses

  • Reappointment of Mr. Berjis Desai (DIN: 00153675) as an Independent Director of the Company
    8 for0 against
  • Reappointment of Mrs. Bhavna Doshi (DIN: 00400508) as an Independent Director of the Company
    8 for0 against

Each fund house counted once, from its own disclosure; the reasons are its own words.

Fines and tax disputes

Reported in the filing for the quarter to Jun 2026.

  • Fine or penaltyChief Judicial Magistrate FaridabadSince 16 May 2026

    Compliant under section 92 of the Factories Act 1948 was filed by Inspector of Factories against Nuvoco Vistas Corporation Ltd. related to Faridabad RMX Plant through Factory Manager imposing a fine of Rs.20,000

    under section 7A of Factories Act'1948 readwith Rule 66B of Panjab Factories Rules 1952
  • Fine or penaltyLabour Court, Raipur, ChhattisgarhSince 9 May 2026

    Compliant under section 92 of the Factories Act 1948 was filed by Inspector of Factories against Mr. Adersh Singh, Factory Manager of Raipur RMX Plant imposing a fine of Rs.70,000

    under section 7A(1) and 7A(2)C of Factories Act'1948
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, BiharSince 31 Dec 2005
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: For the Assessment Year 2001-02, the Bihar Sales Tax Authorities have disallowed sales tax benefits on credit notes for discount other than cash discount. In addition, the Sales Tax Authorities have also not taken congnizance of payments of sales tax and adjustment of entry tax payments against sales tax aggregating to Rs.1.76 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, BiharSince 31 Dec 2005
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: For the year 2002-2003, Bihar Sales Tax department has raised demand by rejecting discounts. The Company has filed an appeal in the Applellate Court. Rs.4.44 crores
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, OrissaSince 30 Apr 2019
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: ET calculated by dept on Sale value rather than STM Value for 2005-07. Tax demand of Rs.56.62 lakhs + 2 times penalty of Rs.1.13 crores DEPARTMENT Appeal allowed. Appeal filed High Court Cuttack Rs.1.70 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner of CustomsSince 31 Mar 2012
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand raised for customs duty of goods imported and warehoused by GKW Ltd in 1996-97 even though LIPL has relinquished the title to the goods. Rs.14.44 crores
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, BiharSince 31 Mar 2013
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand raised by erroneously applying tax on assumed MRP for sales to non-trade customers when tax was correctly paid on the sale price. Penalty of Rs.6.87 cr has not been considered. 2010-11 VAT Rs. 2.29 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner CGST & Excise, Kolkata North CommissionerateSince 1 May 2018
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand of service tax on the VSAT charges deducted by CFAs @ Rs.3.75 per ton from CFA bills alleging recovery of amount by Lafarge for providing intellectual services to CFA for the period Oct 2010 to Sept 2015. SCN issued by DGCEI. Provision created for demand, interest and penalty @ 25%. DEPT FILED APPEAL BEFORE CESTAT. Rs. 1.65 croesMoreLess
69 more
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, BiharSince 31 Mar 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand raised by disallowing adjustment of entry tax paid on cement lying in closing stock (Rs.126 lacs), disallowance of ET adjustment on damaged stock (Rs.75 lacs), tax on stock shortage (Rs0.50 lacs), non-considerance of extra ET brought forward (Rs.417 lacs) & interest (Rs.282 lacs) for 2012-13 in Bihar. Adjusted ET on opening stock (Rs.153 lacs). Rs. 7.08 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Commercial Taxes, BiharSince 31 Mar 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Entry Tax demand raised arising from not considering carry forward of entry tax (Rs.417 lacs) and adjustment of excess ET paid in the period (Rs.38 lacs). Interest imposed is Rs.110 lacs. 2012-13 Rs. 4.89 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Central Excise, UdaipurSince 11 Apr 2019
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand of excise duty on 173 mt of alleged clandestine clinker production and removal without payment of duty from 241 mt of limestone shortage (on the basis of physical stock in Dec 15) ignoring the fact that shortage has been explained and accounted for with reasons. DEPARTMENT APPEAL CESTAT dismissed Dept Appeal. Dept appealed before Jodhpur HC Rs. 5.29 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner of Central Excise, UdaipurSince 30 Jan 2018
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand raised on fiscal incentive received from Rajasthan Govt under RIPS 2010 by adding the incentive to assessable value and charging excise duty. Period: Jan 16 to Jun 17. Rs. 2.10 crores
  • Tax disputeCommisioner of Commercial Taxes, ChhattisgarhSince 31 Dec 2020
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand of Entry Tax denying adjustment of excess ET paid on limestone for clinker stock transfer from Apr15-Dec 15 against ET liability of Jan16-Mar16. Rs. 5.12 crores
  • Tax disputeCommisioner (Preventive) of CGST, ChhattisgarhSince 11 Oct 2023
    Appeal filed against demand of Rs. 0.77 Cr with GSTAT vide acknowledgement no. 2026069101000700 dated 22.06.2026
    At the filing before: Demand of interest (Rs.2.94 cr) & penalty (Rs.0.87 cr) charged on delayed payment of GST under reverse charge on Environment cess and Infrastructure Development Cess and penalty in CG from July 2017 till August 2021. Rs. 3.81 crores After settlement the demand is reduced to Rs. 0.77 crsMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner CGST Audit, RajasthanSince 19 Dec 2023
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand arising from arittmetical calculation errors by the Addl. Commr. in ITC mis-match and denial of ITC of IGST paid on imported inputs, etc. amounting to Rs.47142k for FY19 - FY21 an imposed equal penalty and interest. Being calculation errors, the demand is remote and likely to be dropped in appeal.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeJoint Commissioner of SGST, Corporate Circle, Varanasi-I, UPSince 29 Apr 2024
    Appeal filed against demand of 23.31 Crs with GSTAT vide acknowledgement no. 2026109201000880 dated 29.06.2026
    At the filing before: DRC-01 issued based on audit observation on (i) intra-state STM, (ii) ITC denied on diary/calander, (iii) ITC mismatch even though explains & accepted, (iv) converted cement purchase value difference to sale of RMC, (v) denied ISD ITC, etc. (Tax. Rs.11.37 cr+Int Rs.8.53 cr). Rs. 23.31 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner (CT), Shollinganallur CircleSince 13 Jan 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Reversal of time barred Input Tax Credit Claim(TN VAT) as well as mismatch of transaction. (2014-15) Rs. 2.29 crores
  • Tax disputeJoint Commissioner of CGST, Audit MPSince 26 Jun 2025
    Order in original has been rectified to drop the demand to Rs. 13.32 Lakhs only. Company had filed an appeal against the demand of 13.32 lakhs at the first appellate stage
    At the filing before: The Show Cause Notice seeks to deny the adjustment of GST liability on discount credit notes for 6 years from FY19 to FY24, despite this issue not being raised during audit. Further, it disregards the submitted certificates and does not consider brought forward credit of previous year’s ITC and imposed tax inspite of credit not availed and proposing demand of Rs.10.03 crores.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeAdditional Commissioner. Commercial Tax, ChhattisgarhSince 9 Jun 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Demand Orders seeks to impose entry tax on the movement of mixture of limestone and other inputs inside the factory at 10% in four different orders covering FY 2003 to FY 2006 proposing demand of Rs.16,66,05,560 which includes tax and interest. The demand is raised breaking all rules of limitations going back 23 years and determining demand on assumed quantities and value.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeAdditional Commissioner. Commercial Tax, ChhattisgarhSince 26 May 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Demand Order seeks to impose entry tax on the movement of mixture of limestone and other inputs inside the factory at 10% even though the appropriate entry tax at 1% has been paid and accepted during assessments. There are 4 different demands for FY 2011 to FY 2014 aggregating Rs.6,55,20,000/- plus interest.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner, Comercial Tax, ChhattisgarhSince 5 Jun 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Demand Order seeks to impose entry tax on the movement of mixture of limestone and other inputs inside the factory at 10% even though the appropriate entry tax at 1% has been paid and accepted during assessments. There are 4 different demands for FY 2016-17 raising the demand of entry tax of Rs.3,49,29,507/- with includes tax, interest and penaltyMoreLess
  • Tax disputeExcise & Taxation Officer, HaryanaSince 2 Jun 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Show Cause Notice issued under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017 seeks to deny input tax credit for FY 2018-19 on totally erroneous basis and ignoring the explanations given against discrepancy report, the reversals made, and the reconciliations submitted and raising a demand of Rs.6,50,29,591/- (which includes tax, interest and penalty)MoreLess
  • Tax disputePrincipal Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise- RaipurSince 24 Sep 2025
    Appeal filed against demand vide No. AD220626002692D dated 13.06.2026
    At the filing before: DRC-01 issued alleging invoices raised without actual supply & Goods to enable ITC and corresponding clandestinely supplied without payment of tax & tax not charged on some supplies (Rs.3514k) Penalty of (Rs.372594k) & Tax demand (Rs.372594k) plus penalty (Rs.376108k) imposed. Rs. 112.48 Cr for 2019-Sep24 Demand reduced to Rs. 104.75 CrMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2008
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the CIT (A) - Rs.3.15 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2009
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the CIT (A) - Rs. 4.05 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2010
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs. 5.01 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2011
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs. 7.07 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2011
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL has claimed that IPA in respect of Mejia plant is a Capital receipt hence same is not taxable. However, the Income Tax department has rejected claim on the ground that since same is based on Sales turnover, so same is revenue receipt. The DRP has allowed appeal of the NVCL. The IT department has filed an appeal with the ITAT. - Rs. 9.80 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2012
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs. 6.92 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2012
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL has claimed that IPA in respect of Mejia plant is a Capital receipt hence same is not taxable. However, the Income Tax department has rejected claim on the ground that since same is based on Sales turnover, so same is revenue receipt. The DRP has allowed appeal of the NVCL. The IT department has filed an appeal with the ITAT. - Rs.17.34 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2013
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.8.39 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2013
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL has claimed that IPA in respect of Mejia plant is a Capital receipt hence same is not taxable. However, the Income Tax department has rejected claim on the ground that since same is based on Sales turnover, so same is revenue receipt. The DRP has allowed appeal of the NVCL. The IT department has filed an appeal with the ITAT. - Rs. 16.26 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2014
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs. 13.44 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2014
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL has claimed that IPA in respect of Mejia plant is a Capital receipt hence same is not taxable. However, the Income Tax department has rejected claim on the ground that since same is based on Sales turnover, so same is revenue receipt. The DRP has allowed appeal of the NVCL. The IT department has filed an appeal with the ITAT. Rs. 24.97 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2014
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment for CSS to Lafarge SA as per agreement for various services was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. In the first appeal before the CIT (A)/DRP also disallowed the claim. NVCL has filed an appeal and is pending before the ITAT. Rs. 8.19 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2014
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL was JV partner in ACPCPL for supply of power for ACP. However, due to some issues there was litigation between NVCL and ACPCPL, NVCL took provision for this litigation. IT department disallowed the same on the ground that same should be allowed on actual basis. The DRP have also rejected claim of the NVCL and stated that it should be allowed on actual basis. NVCL has filed an appeal with the ITAT - Rs.14.36 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2015
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.13.80 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2015
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment made to Lafarge SA and Lafarge Asia for IT services as per agreement has been disallowed by IT Department on the assumption that no services have been received by NVCL despite NVCL’s contention that the payment for IT services was at arm’s length price. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.1.59 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2015
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment for CSS to Lafarge SA as per agreement for various services was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. In the first appeal before the CIT (A)/DRP also disallowed the claim. NVCL has filed an appeal and is pending before the ITAT. - Rs.9.17 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2015
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: NVCL was JV partner in ACPCPL for supply of power for ACP. However, due to some issues there was litigation between NVCL and ACPCPL, NVCL took provision for this litigation. IT department disallowed the same on the ground that same should be allowed on actual basis. The DRP have also rejected claim of the NVCL and stated that it should be allowed on actual basis. NVCL has filed an appeal with the ITAT - Rs.5.85 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2016
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.16.40 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2016
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment made to Lafarge SA and Lafarge Asia for IT services as per agreement has been disallowed by IT Department on the assumption that no services have been received by NVCL despite NVCL’s contention that the payment for IT services was at arm’s length price. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.6.14 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2016
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment for CSS to Lafarge SA as per agreement for various services was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. In the first appeal before the CIT (A)/DRP also disallowed the claim. NVCL has filed an appeal and is pending before the ITAT - Rs. 8.39 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Royalty paid @ 1% and then @ 1.5% (w.e.f. Jan12) to Lafarge SA as per agreement for Lafarge brand use was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.15.85 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment made to Lafarge SA and Lafarge Asia for IT services as per agreement has been disallowed by IT Department on the assumption that no services have been received by NVCL despite NVCL’s contention that the payment for IT services was at arm’s length price. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.3.05 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment for CSS to Lafarge SA as per agreement for various services was disallowed by IT Department on the logic that NVCL has not derived any benefit from the brand even though we argued that the payment was at arm’s length price and hence should not be disallowed. In the first appeal before the CIT (A)/DRP also disallowed the claim. NVCL has filed an appeal and is pending before the ITAT - Rs.7.62 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2018
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Payment made to Lafarge SA and Lafarge Asia for IT services as per agreement has been disallowed by IT Department on the assumption that no services have been received by NVCL despite NVCL’s contention that the payment for IT services was at arm’s length price. NVCL has filed appeals and pending before the ITAT - Rs.4.73 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2022
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Income Tax department passed order due to system based incorrect mismatch in the Income Tax Return and Tax Audit Report. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT (A) - Rs.7.09 crores
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2010
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.4.31 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2011
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.24.11 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2013
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.17.06 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2014
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.12.11 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2015
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs. 9.16 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2016
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.6.63 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2017
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.4.97 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2018
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.3.73 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2019
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: In FY 2008-09, Lafarge A&C (LAC) acquired RMX business of L & T and based on Purchase Price Allocation (PPA), claimed depreciation on intangible assets in revised ITR. This claim was rejected on the ground that same was not claimed in original ITR and Tax Audit report. The CIT (A) and ITAT allowed appeal of the LAC and allowed depreciation on all Intangible Assets. The IT Department has filed an appeal with the High Court and the ITAT - Rs.2.80 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14 (1)(1),MumbaiSince 30 Jun 2021
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Income Tax department passed order due to system based incorrect mismatch in the Income Tax Return and Tax Audit Report. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT (A) - Rs.7.09 crores
  • Tax disputeNational Faceless Assessment Centre, DelhiSince 25 Jan 2024
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Income Tax department passed order disallowing deduction claimed u/s 80IA for Transfer Pricing Adjustment, disallowance for depreciation on intangible assets and goodwill and disallowing of claim of provision for doubtful debts. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT(A) - Rs. 12.55 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssessment Unit, Income Tax DepartmentSince 26 Mar 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: The Income Tax Department passed an order imposing penalty for concealment of income. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT(A) - Rs. 23.89 crores
  • Tax disputeNational Faceless Assessment Centre, DelhiSince 28 Mar 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: he Income Tax department passed order disallowing deduction claimed u/s 80IA for Transfer Pricing Adjustment, disallowance for depreciation on intangible assets and goodwill and disallowing of claim of provision for doubtful debts and disallowance of claim of docnation u/s 80G. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT(A) - Rs. 12.78 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssessment Unit, Income Tax DepartmentSince 13 Mar 2026
    The Company received a rectification order dated 5th May 2026 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai (“AO”) wherein the alleged demand of Rs. 11.89 crores raised by the Faceless Assessing Officer upon completion of the assessment has been squashedMoreLess
    At the filing before: The Income Tax department passed order disallowing deduction claimed u/s 80IA for Transfer Pricing Adjustment and disallowance for depreciation on intangible assets . Demand raised of Rs.11.89 crores is erroneous and a rectification application will be filed. NVCL have filed an appeal with CIT(A) against the said assessment order.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeAdditional Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise,Bhubaneshwar CommissionerateSince 19 Jun 2019
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary) Denial of Cenvat on input services for setting up factory Rs. 2.69 crores
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner of CGST, Division C, JodhpurSince 22 Apr 2019
    Appeal filed before GSTAT vide ref No 2026063101000981 Dt 25/06/2026
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Denial of TRAN-1 credit of Service Tax paid on RCM after filing of ST-3 and taken directly in TRAN-1. Rs. 1.31 crores .Online APL 04 received on 22/12/2025MoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Division II, Raipur, ChhattisgarhSince 17 Dec 2020
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Entry Tax exemption claimed under CG incentive scheme disallowed during assessment since eligibility certificate was pending issuance by Industry Department for 2015-16. Rs. 3.86 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Division II, Raipur, ChhattisgarhSince 18 Jan 2021
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Entry Tax exemption claimed under CG incentive scheme disallowed during assessment since eligibility certificate was pending issuance by Industry Department for 2016-17. Rs. 4.48 CrsMoreLess
  • Tax disputePrincipal Commissioner, Bolpur CGST & Central Excise CommissionerateSince 29 Sep 2024
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Denial of Cenvat credit of inputs and services viz. works contract, constrcution and consulting engineer's services & Cenvat of outward GTA services. Rs. 0.18 CrMoreLess
  • Tax disputeCommissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Audit CommissionerateSince 23 Jun 2022
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Denial of cenvat credit on ISD invoices since the input service invoices were dated prior to factory excise registration, services not eligible for cenvat, incomplete information of service providers, etc. Rs. 6.23 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Division II, Raipur, ChhattisgarhSince 28 Dec 2022
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Entry Tax exemption claimed under CG incentive scheme disallowed during assessment since eligibility certificate was pending issuance by Industry Department for 2017 - 18 Q1. Rs. 1.46 croresMoreLess
  • Tax disputeAssistant Commissioner of SGST, Patna Special CircleSince 18 Feb 2023
    Appeal filed before GSTAT vide ref no 2026110101000920 Dt 30-06-2026
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). DRC-01 issued for mismatch of ITC availed between GSTR-2A vs GSTR-3B and adjustment of output tax against tax paid on advance receipt in 2018 - 19. Rs. 5.40 Crs.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeJoint Commissioner of SGST, Division II, RaipurSince 28 Jun 2022
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Denial of ITC on acount of mismatch betwwen GSTR-2A vs GSTR-3B in 2018 - 19 Rs. 11.43 crores
  • Tax disputeAdditional Commissioner (Preventive), CGST, ChhattisgarhSince 6 Nov 2024
    Appeal filed before GSTAT vide ref n0 2026069101000429 Dt 25/06/2026
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Demand of GST under RCM of Rs. 6.37 crores on Environmet Cess and Development cess in Chhattisgarh which has been paid without interestMoreLess
  • Tax disputeJoint Comm(Enforcement) State Tax -RaipurSince 30 Apr 2024
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Difference in Cr.Note between GSTR 1 & GSTR 9, Difference of ITC in Table 8D of GSTR 9, non submission of state wise financials for the FY 2018-19 Rs. 11.06 Crs.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeDeputy Commissioner, Patna SpecialSince 22 Aug 2024
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: This pertains to NU Vista Limited (material wholly owned subsidiary). Difference between GSTR-8A Vs 8D of GSTR 9, Allegation of claim of wrong / ineligible credit for the FY 2019-20 Rs. 6.12 Crs
  • Tax disputeThe Joint Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Bolpur Commissionerate, West BengalSince 30 Jan 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Denial of transitional credit of erstwhile cenvat credit of iron & steel received prior to GST but credit availed thru TRAN-1, 100% cenvat availed on capitals goods without taking 50% under central excise & service tax on outward transportation thru rail and road and works contract. The Officer has ignored the submissions made by the Company and passed a non speaking order confirming alleged demand of CGST of Rs.4.74 Crs alongwith equal penalty and applicable interest.MoreLess
  • Tax disputeJoint Commissioner of State Tax-Jajpur-OdishaSince 27 Feb 2025
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Demand order alleges ineligble itc claimed where it is not utilised in course or furtherance of business, Unaccounted for inwards supply of raw-materials leading to less payment of GST, unaccounted for production of cement by utilising excess quantity of packing materials leading to unaccounted for outward supply. Reveral of ITC on account of non filing of GSTR-3B by vendor, Non reversal of ITC on account of credit note received by the taxpayer during the F.Y- 2020-21, Claim of ITC for ISD invoice.Total Demand Rs.27.80 Cr(Tax Rs15.54,Int Rs.10.69,Penalty Rs.1.55 Cr))MoreLess
  • Tax disputeNational Faceless Assessment Centre, DelhiSince 27 Apr 2021
    There is no update from the last disclosure
    At the filing before: Disallowance of deduction claimed on marked to market gain as per ICDS of Rs. 5.54 Crs. having tax impact of Rs. 1.66 Crs. Ad-hoc disallowance of interest expense amounting to Rs. 34.24 Crs. having tax impact of Rs. 10.27 Crs. Disallowance of claim of depreciation amounting to Rs. 94.12 Lakhs. having tax impact of Rs. 28.23 lakhs.MoreLess

In the company's own words, from its latest governance filing.

Investor complaints and compliance

Quarter by quarter.

Investor complaints received and resolved, the company's own count

  • Received
  • Resolved

Open at the quarter's end

None open at any quarter's end.
The board is made up as the listing rules require
Yes
The board has a regular chairperson
Yes
The company has a risk management committee
Yes
The chair is related to the managing director
No
The filing has a part on fines and penalties
Yes
The filing has a part on tax disputes
Yes
There was a cyber security incident in the quarter
No

The company's own answers in its filing.