2017 (5) TMI 1744 - Tri - Companies Law

Restoration of name of Company in the Registrar of Companies - Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - n the basis of the report of the Registrar of Companies it appears that the name of the company was struck off on account of non-filing of statutory documents w.e.f 2008-2009. The appellant has again filed the application for revival of the company. Permission for revival of the company can only be granted on the condition of compliance with the requisite formalities which the Registrar of Companies has pointed out in his report. The petitioner is directed to file the documents including the Balance Sheets and Annual Returns upto the year 2016 and deposit the fees of ₹ 1,04,000/- as mentioned out in the report of the Registrar of Companies within four weeks from the date of the order. If all the requisite formalities are complied with within the prescribed time, then applicant company may be revived - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against striking off the name of the company
- Non-filing of statutory documents since 2008-2009
- Requirement to file arrear documents and pay fees for revival

Analysis:
The judgment involves an appeal under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 against the Registrar of Companies' decision to strike off the name of a company due to non-filing of statutory documents since 2008-2009. The Registrar's report highlighted the company's non-compliance and the need for revival by filing arrear documents, including Balance Sheets and Annual Returns up to 2016, along with requisite fees. The report detailed the filing fees and additional fees payable for e-filing the pending statutory documents, totaling to Rs. 1,04,000. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with formalities for revival, as indicated by the Registrar of Companies.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal and directed the petitioner to file the necessary documents, deposit the specified fees within four weeks, and comply with all formalities for revival. The judgment stressed that revival of the company is contingent upon meeting the prescribed requirements within the stipulated timeframe. The decision in C.P No. 148.KB/2017 was made, with instructions to forward a copy of the order to the Registrar of Companies. Additionally, certified photocopies of the order were to be provided to the parties upon fulfilling all requisite formalities. The judgment underscores the significance of adhering to the regulatory framework and fulfilling obligations for the company's revival, as outlined by the Registrar of Companies.