9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... struck off by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh U/s 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016, from the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh. 2. Facts of the appeal are stated as under: i. The Appellant Company Sidhant Career Concepts Private Limited was originally incorporated on 14.08.2012 with the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh having CIN U80904UP2012PTC051954. ii. The Appellant Company is involved in business to establish, provide, maintain and run in any part of India Coaching Centres or otherwise for all types of training for all types of training for preparation of Civil services exams, othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its name in the record of RoC. 3. Upon notice being issued to the Respondent, ROC have filed their counter and stated that the name of the company was struck off after duly complying with the provisions of 248 of Companies Act, 2013 Read with Rule 3 of the companies (Removal of names of Companies from Register of companies) rules 2016 after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. No reply to the said Show Cause notice dated 21.05.2018 was received from the Company or its Directors. Further stated that neither any representation was received from company/its directors nor was any objection received from any person, accordingly, the company was dissolved. 4. Further, the Income Tax Authorities in its representation mentioned that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e argument of the Counsel for both the parties and perused the documents submitted by the Appellant. It is not in controversy that the Appellant Company has not filed its Annual Return and Balance Sheet with RoC. Moreover, the dispute regarding Nil turnover of the company is also taken into consideration, but failure on the part of the Appellant and its Directors to adhere to the statutory compliances and also Nil turnover of the Company is attributed to a variety of reasons including adverse market conditions, financial issues etc. The documents relied upon by the Appellant unmistakably demonstrate that the Appellant Company is a living entity. As regards the submissions of Income Tax Department regarding non-filing of returns, as an alter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcessive or inappropriate penalty for that oversight. 12. Accordingly, it is therefore the Registrar of Companies, the Respondent herein, is ordered to restore the original status of the Appellant Company as if the name of the Company has not been struck off from the Registrar of Companies and take all consequential actions such as change of Company's status from 'Strike Off' to 'Active' (for e-filing), restoration of status of DIN etc. 13. The Appellant Company is directed to file all the statutory document(s) along with prescribed fees/additional fee/fine as decided by RoC within thirty days from the date on which its name is restored on the Register of Companies by the RoC. 14. The restoration of the Company's ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
