Next dueCompany / ROC
14 OCTADT-1 · Auditor appointment (after AGM)in 3 days 30 OCTAOC-4 · Financial statements · FY 2025-26in 19 days 31 OCTMSME-1 · Dues to MSMEs · Apr–Sep 2026in 20 days 21 NOVITR filing · Audit cases · AY 2026-27 · extended from 31 Octin 41 days 29 NOVMGT-7 / 7A · Annual return · FY 2025-26in 49 days 30 JUNDPT-3 · Return of deposits · FY 2026-27in 262 days 11 OCTGSTR-1 · Outward supplies · Sep 2026due today 15 OCTPF & ESI · Contributions · Sep 2026in 4 days
All due dates

Sections 275–276 of the Companies Act, 2013: Appointing and removing the Company Liquidator

The Tribunal appoints the Company Liquidator when it passes the winding-up order (s.275(1)), from insolvency professionals registered under the IBC (s.275(2), as substituted). The...

Published
Updated
Reading time
7 min
Views
10
Questions
7 answered
  • Expert Reviewed
  • High Complexity
Topic
MCA Compliance
Published
September 30, 2026
Last updated
Oct 10, 2026
Reading time
7 min
0:00
Last updated: October 2026Verified against: Government sources

Sections 275 and 276 govern who runs a winding up by the Tribunal and how that person can be replaced. The Tribunal appoints the Company Liquidator at the time of the winding-up order, and a provisional liquidator may be appointed earlier. Both must be drawn from insolvency professionals registered under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Context: winding up after the IBC

Since the IBC, insolvency and voluntary winding up are handled under that Code. Winding up by the Tribunal under the Companies Act continues on the grounds left in section 271. Sections 275 and 276 then decide who conducts it. The consolidated text shows that sub-section (2) of section 275 was substituted and sub-section (4) omitted by the IBC's Eleventh Schedule with effect from 15 November 2016. For background on how the IBC route differs, see IBC vs Companies Act winding up and our note on the liquidator under the IBC.

Whether you are a creditor seeking the right person or a director facing a liquidator's scrutiny, our legal dispute resolution team can explain where you stand.

Section 275: appointment

Sub-sectionWhat it says
(1)At the time of the winding-up order the Tribunal appoints an Official Liquidator or a liquidator from the panel maintained under sub-section (2) as the Company Liquidator
(2)Substituted: the provisional liquidator or Company Liquidator is appointed from among insolvency professionals registered under the IBC
(3)The Tribunal may limit and restrict a provisional liquidator's powers by the appointing order or later; otherwise he has the same powers as a liquidator
(4)Omitted by the IBC (w.e.f. 15-11-2016)
(5)Terms of appointment and fee are specified by the Tribunal on the basis of the task, experience, qualification of the liquidator and size of the company
(6)Declaration within seven days of appointment in the prescribed form disclosing conflict of interest or lack of independence; the obligation continues throughout the term
(7)While passing a winding-up order, the Tribunal may appoint the provisional liquidator (under s.273(1)(c)) as the Company Liquidator

Points to note

  • Sub-section (1) and (2) read together. Sub-section (1) still refers to an Official Liquidator or a liquidator from a panel. Sub-section (2) now says the appointee comes from IBC-registered insolvency professionals. Read the current text with the Tribunal's practice, and confirm the current position.
  • Provisional liquidator. The Tribunal's power to appoint one comes from section 273; our note on the provisional liquidator's appointment and powers covers it. Section 275(3) lets the Tribunal narrow those powers.
  • Fee. Sub-section (5) ties the fee to the task, experience, qualification and company size. The Tribunal fixes it; the parties do not negotiate it freely.
  • Independence. The seven-day declaration is continuing: a conflict that arises later must also be disclosed.

Section 276: removal and replacement

Under sub-section (1), the Tribunal may, "on a reasonable cause being shown and for reasons to be recorded in writing", remove the provisional liquidator or Company Liquidator on any of these grounds:

ClauseGround
(a)Misconduct
(b)Fraud or misfeasance
(c)Professional incompetence or failure to exercise due care and diligence in performing powers and functions
(d)Inability to act as provisional liquidator or Company Liquidator
(e)Conflict of interest or lack of independence during the term that would justify removal

Replacement and recovery

  • Sub-section (2). On death, resignation or removal, the Tribunal may transfer the work to another Company Liquidator, for reasons recorded in writing.
  • Sub-section (3). If the Tribunal is of the opinion that a liquidator is responsible for loss or damage to the company through fraud, misfeasance or failure to exercise due care and diligence, it may recover the loss from the liquidator and pass other orders it thinks fit.
  • Sub-section (4). Before passing any order under the section, the Tribunal must give the liquidator a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

The text says the Tribunal "may" act; it does not say who may apply. The Tribunal can act on an application or on its own view, so check how the Tribunal handles such applications in practice.

Who is affected

Creditors and contributories can point to these grounds if the liquidator is not protecting the company's assets. Directors should note that the liquidator will later demand cooperation (see section 284). The liquidator also convenes the winding-up committee and reports to the Tribunal (see section 277). For the role in summary, read the role of the Official Liquidator.

Proposed change

The Corporate Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026 has no clause amending section 275 or 276. Its winding-up clause touches section 271 only. The Bill is pending and is not law as on 30 September 2026.

Practical examples

Example 1: appointment with the order. The Tribunal orders winding up of a company that defaulted in filings for five years. In the same order it appoints an IBC-registered insolvency professional as Company Liquidator and fixes the fee by reference to the company's size and the work involved. The liquidator files a declaration within seven days.

Example 2: provisional to final. A provisional liquidator was appointed on the petition. When making the winding-up order, the Tribunal appoints the same person as Company Liquidator under section 275(7).

Example 3: conflict discovered. The liquidator's firm is found to have advised a major creditor earlier, and this was not disclosed. The Tribunal, after hearing the liquidator, may remove him under section 276(1)(e), record its reasons and transfer the work under sub-section (2).

Need help with a liquidator issue?

Questions about conflict, fees or removal need the Tribunal's order and the file in front of them. We can read the record with you and explain the options open under the Act. Reach our team through legal dispute resolution.

Key takeaways

  • The Company Liquidator is appointed by the Tribunal when it passes the winding-up order.
  • The appointee comes from IBC-registered insolvency professionals under section 275(2).
  • A declaration on conflict of interest is due within seven days and the duty continues.
  • Section 276 lists five grounds for removal, each requiring reasons in writing and a hearing for the liquidator.
  • The Tribunal can recover losses caused by fraud, misfeasance or want of due care.
  • The Bill, 2026 does not amend these sections and is not law.

Read next

Disclaimer: Based on the Companies Act, 2013 as amended up to 1 April 2021 (official consolidated text), read with later developments noted in the article; proposals in the Corporate Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026 are pending and not law as on 30 September 2026. Verify current notifications and rules before acting.

Quick recapKey facts & short answers

Key Facts About Sections 275

  • Applies in: All states across India, under the relevant central law.
  • Mode: Mostly online via the official government portal.
  • Typical timeline: Ranges from a few days to a few weeks depending on the case.
  • Non-compliance: May attract penalties, interest or late fees.
  • Expert help: TaxClue completes the entire process end to end for you.

Who appoints the Company Liquidator?

The Tribunal, at the time of passing the winding-up order.

Who can be appointed?

Under section 275(2), as substituted, an insolvency professional registered under the IBC.

A penalty is the visible cost of a delay; the lost time and credibility are the larger part.

— TaxClue Compliance Desk

Sections 275: a key compliance topic in Indian tax and corporate law that businesses and individuals must understand to remain compliant.

Related Services & Guides

Was this article helpful?
About the author
13,350 articles
Vikas Sharma Verified expert Tax & Compliance Expert

Experienced in company registration, GST, trademark, and compliance. Helping Indian businesses stay compliant.

Last reviewed: Live

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute professional tax, legal or financial advice. Laws, rates and due dates change and can vary by individual case — always verify with the relevant government source (e.g. mca.gov.in, incometax.gov.in) or consult a qualified professional before acting. TaxClue accepts no liability for decisions taken based on this content.

People also ask

Questions, answered

Short, direct answers to the 7 questions readers ask most on this topic.

The Tribunal, at the time of passing the winding-up order.

Under section 275(2), as substituted, an insolvency professional registered under the IBC.

Yes. Section 275(7) allows the Tribunal to do so while passing the winding-up order.

The Tribunal, on the basis of the task, experience, qualification and company size.

By a declaration within seven days of appointment, and the obligation continues throughout the term.

Misconduct, fraud or misfeasance, professional incompetence or lack of due care, inability to act, and conflict of interest or lack of independence.

Yes, where the Tribunal finds loss caused by fraud, misfeasance or failure of due care and diligence.