9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the misconduct, as noticed in the present Appeals, further leniency is required to be shown - appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) No.415 of 2018, 416 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 7-2-2019 - Justice A.I.S. Cheema Member (Judicial) And Balvinder Singh Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri Niraj Trivedi, PCS For the Respondents : Shri Sanjib K. Mohanty, Advocate JUDGEMENT A.I.S. CHEEMA, J. : 1. These two Appeals arise out of two Impugned Orders passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad ( NCLT , in short). Both the Appeals are taken up together for disposal by this common Judgement, as parties are same and the matters relate to compounding of offences under the Companies Act albeit u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unding under Section 441 along with now deceased Ishwarlal Jariwala which was forwarded by ROC to NCLT, Ahmedabad. NCLT, Ahmedabad passed the Impugned Order. The Appeal claims that the Appellants had suo moto moved ROC for filing the Form and suo moto applied for compounding, but the NCLT had imposed fine which aggregates to ₹ 17,62,800/- which, it is claimed, is exorbitant. According to the Appellants, the ROC had never found fault with the Appellants and they should not be made to pay such huge fine as they had themselves approached the ROC. The Appellants further claimed that since Ishwarlal Jariwala has died after the Impugned Order was passed, this Tribunal should set aside the fine as was imposed on Ishwarlal Jariwala. CA 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uired to be paid by Ishwarlal Jariwala, who has now expired. 5. In both the Appeals, the ROC has filed Reply titled as - Representation. Arguments 6. We have heard Counsel for Appellants in both the Appeals and the Counsel for ROC. At the time of arguments, the learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that there was delay in filing of Returns in both these Appeals. When we had asked the learned Counsel to show as to how the fault could be found with Impugned Orders, where they have made calculations of fine applying the concerned provisions in the two matters. The learned Counsel fairly accepted that the calculations of days and quantum of fine as imposed is within the parameters provided by the concerned Sections. He submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... February, 2017. 9. We are not inclined to take further lenient view regarding the quantum as it appears to us that NCLT has already given the concession possible to the Appellants. In fact, the provisions violated are aimed at transparency and when in given time, the informations are not provided to ROC or Forms are not submitted, such defaults open doors for various misconducts which we have noticed in so many matters coming up before us with regard to oppression and mismanagement. We are of the view that delays in compliance of the provisions of Companies Act regarding submission of Returns and Forms are source of mischiefs in various instances. These lapses need to be viewed seriously. Even if on facts in a given case, leniency may be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
