9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t clause of Memorandum of Association of the Company and was regular in filing of Income Tax Returns with the Income Tax Dept. However, in advertently the company failed to file its audited financial statements and annual returns for the financial years ended on 31/03/2014 to 31/03/2017. 3. Also the appellants were received notice u/s. 248(I)(c) of the companies Act, 2013 dated 22/03/2017. But the appellant were shocked to note that the name of the company was struck of from the Register maintained by the respondent, Registrar of Companies, West Bengal before 1 month time to reply to the notice issued by the respondent. 4. The appellants further contend that the company is carrying on business and in operation on the date of striking of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d other appellants are Abhijeet Jaggannath Bangad (appellant no. 3) and Vinayak Kangaonkar (appellant no. 4). 8. The above referred are the appellants, who have preferred this appeal. Affidavits in support of the contentions raised in the appeal memorandum in Form 6 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 have been filed by the above said appellants. The affidavit affirmed by Mr. Dinesh Kantilal Rathi representing Ushmesh and Akhilesh Enterprises Private Limited is a director of Ushmesh and Akhilesh Enterprises Private Limited and two other appellants, i.e., 3rd and 4th appellants (Mr. Abhijeet Jagannath Bangad and Vinayak Kangaonkar) have affirmed their respective affidavit as a directorof the appellant company, namely, Jaishree Dealcom Private Limited. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the Memorandum and Article of Association there are two shareholders, one is Mr. Prakash Joshi and the other one is Ms. Dolly Yadav. There is no pleadings in the appeal memorandum that the shareholders referred to in the Memorandum and Article of Association are subsequently changed by induction of appellants as directors or that they have acquired shares of the appellant company and become shareholders on the date of filing of the appeal memorandum. I do not find any force in the arguments advanced by the appellants, that the appeal is to be considered on merit as the appellant directors are also shareholders of the appellant company. 11. In view of the above said discussions, I come to a conclusion that the appeal preferred by the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
