Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (2) TMI 1884

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ction taken by the ROC but submits that due to absence of Accountant of the Company without proper intimation, without handing over the charge held by him resulted in non-compliance of the statutory requirements. The shareholders of the Company also were not aware of the absence of the Accountant from the Company. We are convinced with the reasons given by the Petitioner for restoration of the name of the Company. Therefore we are inclined to direct the Respondent to restore name of Company, however, subject to complying with statutory Compliances along with requisite fee as per law within a period of 30 days, and to payment of cost of ₹ 20,000/-. The Registrar of Companies, Karnataka, the Respondent herein, is ordered to restor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ffice at No. 274, V.R. Manor, Next to Bank of Baroda, 100 Feet Road, Indiranagar, Bangalore - 560 038. The Authorised Share Capital of the Company is ₹ 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Only) divided into 1,00,000 Equity Shares of ₹ 100/- each and the issue, subscribed and paid up capital of ₹ 1,00,000/- divided into 1,000 equity shares of ₹ 100/- each. The main objects of the Company inter alia are to carry on the business of Builders and Developers in Real Estate. The Petitioner Company has been active ever since its incorporation and has been maintaining the Book of Accounts in accordance with the Provisions of the Act. (2) It is stated that the Company is Solvent and the total revenue from its operations for the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Accountant to file the said documents with the Respondent, and they came to know about the violation, only after the name of Company was struck off from the Register of the Respondent by the impugned order. It is alleged that the Respondent has not given notice as per law before striking of name of the Company by publishing Notice No. STK-7 NOTICE/DRIVE-1-3/2019 dated 09.08.2019 u/s 248(5) of the Companies Act 2013. Consequently the Petitioner Company was disabled from filing the audited Financial Statements and the annual Returns of the Petitioner Company for the said years with the Respondent. It is contended that objective of Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act 2013 is to give chance to the Company, its Members and Creditors to revi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g companies were crystalized, the Respondent proceeded to strike off the name of the Company from the Register of Companies and published a Notice in STK-7 in the Official Gazette on 24.08.2019 stating that from 09.08.2019 names of the Companies mentioned therein including the Petitioner Company have been struck off from the Register of Companies as per section 248(5) of the Act. The Respondent has complied with all the procedure prescribed u/s 248 of Companies Act, 2013 before removal of the name from the Register. (3) The Petitioner in his petition has given the reasons, which led the Company to be struck off and justifying the revival of the Company. It is inter alia stated in the petition that the Company with the respondent to the A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntimation, without handing over the charge held by him resulted in non-compliance of the statutory requirements. The shareholders of the Company also were not aware of the absence of the Accountant from the Company. However they have expressed readiness for filing the financial statement for the period 2013-14 to 2018-19 along with filing fee and additional fees and requisite fee as applicable on the date of filing. The ROC has also stated that there is no other enquiry, investigation and complaints against the company. 6. Therefore, we are convinced with the reasons given by the Petitioner for restoration of the name of the Company. Therefore we are inclined to direct the Respondent to restore name of Company, however, subject to comply .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates