9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r company which has been struck off by the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana. 2. M/s. Arora Buildwell Private Limited was incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 originally in the name of Purshottam Ispat Private Limited on 11.03.2002. Subsequently on 07.03.2005 the name of the company was changed to the present name i.e. Arora Buildwell Private Limited. The registered office of the company is 586A, 6 Govind Puri, New Delhi - 110019, within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. 3. It is the case of petitioner that the name of the Company was struck off from the Registrar of Companies under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013, by a suo moto action of the Respondent, after issuing the notification under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been audited by the statutory auditor. Copies of audited financial statements for the said financial years ending on 31.03.2014, 31.03.2015 and 31.03.2016 have been placed on record. 6. It is also the case of the appellants that the Company has been filing the necessary Income Tax Returns, Service Tax Returns and also depositing Advance Tax etc. Copy of acknowledgement receipts of Income Tax Returns for the Assessment year 31.03.2015, 31.03.2016 and 31.03.2017, Copies of statements of TDS deposits, and copies of service tax returns FORM- ST-1, ST-2, and ST-3 have been placed on record. Additionally, bank account statement of the company for the period from 01.04.2016 to 15.07.2017 showing regular transactions of the company, copy of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide its Office memorandum, No. 3/53/2017. CL.II dated 07.02.2017. It is further stated that due steps had been taken in accordance with the statutory provisions under Section 248 (1) 248 (4) of the Companies Act, 2013 before striking off the name of the petitioner company from their register. It is further stated in the report that the action was initiated as the Company did not file the Balance Sheet and Annual Returns since 31.03.2014, which gave rise to the reasonable presumption that the petitioner company was not in operation. 9. The respondent Registrar of Companies in its report, however, has stated that it has no objection if the name of the company is restored in the Register of Companies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Official Gazette of the notice under sub-section (5) of section 248 may, if satisfied that the company was, at the time of its name being struck off, carrying on business or in operation or otherwise it is just that the name of the company be restored to the register of companies, order the name of the company to be restored to the register of companies, and the Tribunal may, by the order, give such other directions and make such provisions as deemed just for placing the company and all other persons in the same position as nearly as may be as if the name of the company had not been struck off from the register of companies." (Emphasis Given) 12. A perusal of the aforesaid provisions shows that any person aggrieved by the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he company was flourishing but accounts could not be filed due to secretary's negligence, restoration was ordered. In the present case there are sufficient evidence to show that the company was active and running since its incorporation. 15. The facts of the case are also similar to the law laid down in the matter of Purushottamdass v. Registrar of Co., Maharashtra [1986] 60 Comp Case 154 (Bom.), wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court under the old Companies Act, 1956 has held that: "The object of Section 560(6) of the Companies Act is to give a chance to the company, its members and creditors to revive the company which has been struck off by the Registrar of Companies, within period of 20 years, and give them an opportunity of carrying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of the Company subject to filing of statutory returns with fees as prescribed. Besides nobody would be prejudiced by the restoration of the name of the Company. On the contrary the restoration is clearly in the interest of the company. Even if the management of the company entrusted with the responsibility of filing of statutory returns had failed to do so, yet since the company is a running company and the application has been filed in time, the Tribunal clearly has the power to restore the name of the company. The lapses on the part of the management in non- filing of annual returns and financial statements in time can be countered by imposing cost. In these factual background and in the interest of justice the appeal filed by the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
