9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (4) TMI 1072 - Tri - Companies LawSeeking to restore the name of the Company in the Register of Companies - Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - The Company has not deposited heavy cash in its Bank Account during the period of demonetization. Copy of Bank statement along with demonetization affidavit is enclosed to the Application. We are satisfied with the reasons shown by the Applicant for restoration of the name of the Company in the register of companies maintained by the Respondent - By exercising the powers conferred on this Tribunal under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, and Rule 87-A of NCLT (Amendment) rules 2017, R/w. NCLT Rules, 2016 and basing on the assurance given by the Learned representative for Applicant Company would be making good all pending statutory compliances on restoration of the Company, it seems to be a fit case to order restoration of the Company by RoC (H) in the interest of the Company, its shareholders and the Creditors. The Registrar of Companies, the respondent herein, is ordered to restore the original status of the Company as if the name of the company has not been struck off from the Register of Companies - application allowed.
Issues:
Application under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of company's name in the Register of Companies due to defaults in statutory compliances. Analysis: The Applicant Company, M/s. Tricity Constructions Private Limited, filed an application under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, seeking directions to restore its name in the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad. The company was struck off the register due to defaults in filing financial statements and annual returns for several years. The company cited financial crisis as the reason for not filing these documents, emphasizing that it is still operational and willing to comply with pending statutory requirements. The company's representative highlighted that the failure to file returns was unintentional and due to oversight. The Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad, submitted a report stating that the company had not filed financial statements and annual returns since its incorporation, leading to the issuance of notices and eventual striking off. The RoC pointed out that the company showed zero revenue from operations for a significant period, indicating non-activity. The RoC also mentioned that certain documents like ITR acknowledgments were missing for some years. After considering the submissions from both parties, the Tribunal found merit in the Applicant Company's arguments for restoration. The Tribunal acknowledged the company's readiness to file the necessary documents and observed that the reasons provided for restoration were satisfactory. The Tribunal exercised its powers under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, and directed the RoC to restore the company's name in the register. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of fulfilling pending statutory compliances upon restoration and ordered the company to pay a cost of ?3,00,000 for revival. The order specified various directions for the company to follow post-restoration, including filing statutory documents, addressing observations by the RoC, and publishing the restoration order in the official Gazette. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the company's application for restoration, highlighting the significance of compliance, and directed the Registrar of Companies to take necessary actions to revive the company while ensuring future adherence to statutory requirements.
|
