9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 566X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompanies, 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 M/s. Maharana Constructions Private Limited was originally incorporated on 28.02.2006 with the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh having CIN U45201UP2006PTC031440. ii. The Appellant Company is involved in business of builders, contractors, designers, architects, decorates, furniture, consultancy, contractors, financers and brokers of all type of buildings and structures, includes houses, flats, apartments, offices, godowns, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the ROC due to default in statutory compliances. It has been stated that company has been continuously doing the business but due to financial crunch and other engagements of the managements in the field of education, could not start the projects again and there are no statutory dues as on date payable by the company. v. It has been stated that during the course of its business the company has neither being involved in the trading of shares, mutual funds and other investments nor given any loan or raised any liabilities from bank or financial institutions and also stated that the company is not a shell company. 3. Upon notice being issued to the Respondent, ROC have filed their counter and stated that the name of the company was struck ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and advances amounting to Rs. 1,821,000/- and the appellant has also annexed the copy of the sale deed dated 14.09.2007 as Annexure 4 of the petition which shows that company is in operation and can restart its business with the assets available. As per the details, the Appellant Company is having substantial assets. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Appellant Company is not carrying on any business or operations. 6. Further, the appellant has also annexed ITR for the Assessment Year 2016-2017 to 2018-2019 to show the company is an ongoing concern. 7. Further, it is averred by the Appellant Company, that, in the event of revival of the Company and restoration of the name of the Company in the Register maintained by the Registrar of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d justify the restoration of its name in the Register of Companies. A step as stringent as what has been taken at least requires an opportunity to the appellant to take remedial measures. Merely to disallow restoration on grounds of its failure to file annual returns would neither be just nor equitable. As per several decisions of various courts it should only be an exceptional circumstance that court should refuse restoration where the company has been struck off for its failure to file annual return as that would be excessive 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 t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
