9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 12 - Tri - Companies LawSeeking to restore the name of the Company in the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies - Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT - After going through the provisions of Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, this Tribunal is of the view that the Company was in existence and it is a going concern and name of the Company to be restored in the Register of Companies as maintained by RoC. 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 and take all consequential actions like change of company's status from 'Strike off to Active (for e-filing) and to intimate the; bankers about restoration of the name of the company so as to defreeze its accounts - Application allowed.
Issues:
1. Restoration of company name in the Register of Companies under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Analysis: The Company Application sought direction to restore the name of a Private Limited Company in the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad. The Applicant, the Director and Shareholder of the Company, acknowledged the failure to file Annual Returns and Financial Statements from 2007-2008 to 2019-2020, attributing it to oversight. The Company's main objects included various business activities related to real estate and construction. The Applicant provided justifications, including financial statements, to support the claim that the Company was operational and willing to rectify the non-compliance issues. The Respondent, Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad, opposed the Application, highlighting the Company's prolonged default in filing necessary documents, resulting in its strike off under Section 248(1). The Respondent questioned the purpose of restoration, citing zero revenue from operations in previous years and discrepancies in financial records. Additionally, the Respondent raised concerns about the non-filing of ITRs, freezing of DINs of directors, and the need for clarifications on financial discrepancies. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the Company's current financial status, noting its Total Assets and Revenue from Operations as of March 2020. After thorough review and application of Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, the Tribunal concluded that the Company was operational and justified the restoration of its name in the Register of Companies. The Tribunal issued specific directions to the Registrar of Companies for restoration, compliance verification, and payment of costs, emphasizing the need for immediate action on pending filings and tax returns. In the final order, the Tribunal directed the Registrar of Companies to restore the Company's status, address financial discrepancies, and ensure compliance with statutory requirements within specified timelines. The order also mandated the payment of costs for revival, publication of the order in the official Gazette, and clarified that the restoration order was limited to specific violations leading to the strike off, allowing further actions for any other offenses committed by the Company.
|
