Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2020 (12) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 158 - Tri - Companies LawRestoration of name of the company which was struck off from the Register of Companies - Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - The grounds contemplated under Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013, are that the company was carrying on business or was in operation at the time of striking off its name or where it appears just to the Adjudicating Authority that the name of the company is to be restored to the Register of Companies and the Section 252(1) further contemplates that one of the three conditions are required to be satisfied before exercising jurisdiction to restore the company to its original name on the register of the Registrar of Companies. 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 Appeal 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. The Public Notice of Registrar of Companies, striking off the name of the company, is hereby declared illegal and set aside. The restoration of the company s name to the Register of Registrar of Companies is ordered subject to its filing of all outstanding documents - Appeal allowed.
Issues involved:
Appeal against striking off company's name under Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013. Analysis: 1. Background: The appeal was filed against the striking off of a company's name by the Registrar of Companies under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013. 2. Company Details: The company was incorporated as a Private Limited Company with a specific Authorized Share Capital and main business objectives related to managerial resourcing and other allied activities. 3. Reason for Striking Off: The company's name was struck off due to non-filing of Balance Sheets and Annual Returns for the Financial Years 2017, 2018, and 2019, indicating non-operation of the business. 4. Appellant's Evidence: The appellant provided evidence of the company's operations, including Audited Financial Statements, Bank Statements, Income Tax Returns, and GST Returns, demonstrating business activities and financial transactions. 5. ROC's Response: The Registrar of Companies had no objection to restoring the company's name if all pending statutory documents were filed with requisite late filing fees. 6. Legal Grounds: Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 provides grounds for restoration, requiring the company to be in operation or justifying restoration in the interest of stakeholders. 7. Decision: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, declaring the striking off of the company's name as illegal. The restoration was ordered upon completion of all formalities and payment of prescribed fees, including a contribution to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund. 8. Outcome: The company's name was restored to the Register of Registrar of Companies, as if it had not been struck off, in accordance with the Companies Act, 2013. 9. Conclusion: The appeal was allowed and disposed of, with the order to be served to the parties involved.
|