9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 13 - Tri - Companies LawRestoration of name of the company in the Registrar of Companies - Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - The Appellant has submitted sufficient evidence that it has been in operation during the period preceding strike off, therefore it could not be termed as a defunct company as per section 252 of the Act. Thus, taking into consideration the provisions of Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, which vests this Tribunal with a discretion where the Company, whose name has been struck off, and such Company is able to demonstrate that it is just to do so, can restore the name of the Company, in the Register and in the interest of all stakeholders, including the Appellant itself, who seeks restoration of the name of the Company in the register maintained by Registrar of Companies, the company deserve to be restored. Appeal allowed.
Issues:
1. Appeal against striking off the name of a company under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. Detailed Analysis: 1. The appeal was filed by a company against the order of striking off its name by the Registrar of Companies under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013. The company argued that it was incorporated as a Private Limited Company and provided details of its registered office and share capital structure. 2. The Registrar of Companies had struck off the company's name due to the non-filing of Financial Statements and Annual Returns for the financial years ending on 31.03.2016, 31.03.2017, and 31.03.2018, indicating that the business of the company was not operational. The company contended that it was operational and provided evidence such as Audited Financial Statements, Bank Statements, and Income Tax Returns to support its claim. 3. The Registrar of Companies stated that they had no objection to restoring the company's name in the Register if all pending statutory documents were filed along with the requisite late filing fees. The Income Tax Department did not file any reply during the proceedings. 4. The Tribunal considered the grounds under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, which require the company to be carrying on business or in operation at the time of striking off its name. The Tribunal found that the company had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it was operational before the striking off, thus justifying the restoration of its name. 5. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, declared the striking off of the company's name as illegal, and ordered the restoration of the company's name in the Register of Companies. The company was directed to file all outstanding documents with proper fees, pay additional fees as required by law, and make a payment to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund. The company's name was to be restored as if it had not been struck off under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013. Overall, the Tribunal granted the appeal, set aside the order of striking off the company's name, and ordered the restoration of the company's name in the Register of Companies upon fulfilling the specified conditions and payments.
|
