Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2019 (2) TMI Tri This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (2) TMI 1884 - Tri - Companies Law


Issues:
1. Restoration of the name of the Company on the Register of Companies.
2. Compliance with statutory requirements under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Analysis:
1. The issue in question pertains to the restoration of the name of a Company on the Register of Companies. The petitioner, a shareholder of the Company, filed a Company Petition seeking the restoration of the Company's name, which was struck off by the Registrar of Companies. The petitioner contended that the Company was solvent, actively conducting business, and had assets and ongoing operations. The Registrar of Companies initiated action to strike off the Company's name due to non-filing of balance sheets and annual returns. The Registrar followed the prescribed procedures under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 before striking off the name of the Company. The petitioner acknowledged the non-compliance but attributed it to the sudden departure of the Company's Accountant without fulfilling his duties. The petitioner expressed readiness to file all outstanding statutory documents and comply with the necessary requirements for restoration.

2. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and provisions of the Companies Act, 2013, acknowledged that the Registrar of Companies had taken the impugned action in accordance with the law. However, the Tribunal found merit in the petitioner's reasons for seeking restoration of the Company's name. The Tribunal directed the Respondent to restore the name of the Company on the Register, subject to the Company complying with all statutory compliances within 30 days and paying a cost of ?20,000. The restoration was contingent upon filing all statutory documents with prescribed fees and ensuring compliance with the directives of the Tribunal. The Tribunal emphasized that the restoration order did not absolve the Company from any other violations or offenses and allowed the Registrar of Companies to take appropriate actions for any other violations committed by the Company.

In conclusion, the Tribunal granted the relief sought by the petitioner for the restoration of the Company's name on the Register of Companies, subject to fulfilling statutory requirements and payment of costs. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with legal obligations and provided a framework for the Company to rectify the non-compliance issues that led to the striking off of its name.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates