9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicial to the shareholders of the company - The order is liable to be set aside and is hereby set aside. - Company Appeal (AT) No.22 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2019 - Justice Jarat Kumar Jain Member (Judicial), Mr. Balvinder Singh Member (Technical) And Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Mr. Abhay K. Das, Advocate JUDGEMENT JUSTICE JARAT KUMAR JAIN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 421 of Companies Act, 2013 against the order dated 29.11.2018 passed by the National Company Law tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata whereby dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of striking of the name of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the memo of appeal filed before the NCLT Kolkata as well as before this Tribunal. Appellant No.2 company is a shareholder of the appellant No.1 company and in support a copy of the share certificate and affidavit of Dinesh Kanti Lal Rathi are annexed with Memo of Appeal. Dinesh Kanti Lal Rathi being the director of appellant No.2 is competent to maintain the appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the appellant No.1 was regularly carrying on business as stated in the main object clause of Memorandum of Association of the company and was regularly filing income tax returns with the Income Tax Department. However, inadvertently the company failed to file its audited financial statement and annual r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the memo of appeal being a director of appellant No.2 company. 9. Appellant No.3 is also shareholder of the company. In support of this fact they have filed the share certificate (Annexure A-8 Page 149) and annual returns of appellant No.1 company for the period 30.09.2013. Thus we find that the appellant No.3 being a shareholder is competent to file the appeal as per Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The findings of NCLT Kolkata that the appeal is not maintainable is not correct. 10. We have considered the appeal on merit. Undisputedly the appellants have not filed the annual returns since the financial year 2013-2014 onwards. The appellant company is regularly carrying on its business, in suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
