9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 932 - AT - Companies LawSeeking restoration of the name of the Appellant Company in the register maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai - petitioner (Appellant herein) failed to provide necessary information and proper financial statement - HELD THAT - The company was making efforts to start mining activity and that its mining licence was under consideration of the Government, which should have been considered by the NCLT. Hence, impugned order dated 18.11.2019 is set aside. The appeal filed by the appellants before the NCLT is restored to the original file subject to condition that Appellant Company shall pay costs of Rs. 50,000/- to the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai within six (6) weeks from the passing of this judgment. The NCLT is requested to hear the parties after issuance of notice, and pass reasoned order in accordance with law at an early date. Appeal disposed off.
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the restoration of a company's name in the register maintained by the Registrar of Companies (RoC) under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Appellant's Appeal for Restoration of Company Name - The Appellant filed an appeal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013, challenging the order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dismissing the appeal for restoration of the company's name in the RoC register. - The NCLT dismissed the appeal citing the Appellant's failure to provide necessary information and proper financial statements. Issue 2: Background and Business Activities of the Appellant Company - The Appellant company, Metro Mining Pvt. Ltd., was incorporated in 2012 with the main objective of mining, processing, and trading of various materials. - The company applied for and received a Prospective Licence for Decorative Stone in Odisha. - The company submitted necessary documents, audit reports, and applications for mining licenses to government authorities. Issue 3: Allegations and Arguments - The Appellant argued that the company was actively engaged in business activities, evidenced by the submission of various documents and applications. - The Appellant claimed that the company's name was struck off due to the fault of the Company Secretary in not providing correct information to the RoC. - The Respondent, RoC, contended that the company's name was struck off due to continuous non-filing of statutory returns and inaction on the part of the company and its directors. Issue 4: Decision and Directions - The Appellate Tribunal set aside the NCLT's order and restored the appeal to the original file. - The Appellant was directed to pay costs to the RoC within six weeks. - The NCLT was instructed to hear the parties and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the law promptly. Conclusion: The judgment highlights the importance of compliance with statutory requirements and the need for proper documentation to maintain a company's active status in the RoC register. The decision emphasizes the significance of providing accurate information to regulatory authorities and the consequences of non-compliance with filing obligations.
|
