9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant's Submissions: 2. Shri S. Palanikumar, PCS appearing for the appellant submitted that the Appellant filed application before the NCLT, for order and direction to set aside the striking off the name of the Appellant company from the Registrar of Companies, Coimbatore. 3. It is submitted that the ROC Coimbatore struck off the appellant's company's name from the Register maintained by the ROC due to defaults in statutory compliances, namely failure to file financial statements and annual return for the period from financial year 2013-2014 onwards. Consequently, the ROC Coimbatore had initiated proceedings under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 for the purpose of striking off the name of the Company from the Register maintai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice on the Respondent, this Tribunal proceeded to hear the matter on merits and on the basis of records available. 7. The NCLT after hearing the Appellant passed the following order at Paras 9 and 10 which is extracted hereunder: "9. The Learned Authorised Representative has miserably failed to establish or place on record any document to show that the Company, for the immediately preceding two years from the date of strike off that it has been active and doing business, however on the contrary it has been pleaded in the Application itself that the Company has closed its operations as early as in the year 1998 itself, which goes on to show that the Company has been inactive since 1998. An opportunity was afforded to the Learned Authorize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carry on the business namely Cotton Spinners and Doublers, Flax hemp and Jute Spinners, Linen Manufactures, Woollen Merchants, etc. 9. While so, the Respondent issued Public Notice in Form No.STK-5 dated 08.06.2018 under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 stating that the Companies as mentioned in Annexure have not been carrying on any business or operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years and have not made any application within such period for obtaining the status of Dormant Company under Section 455 of the Companies Act, 2013. Further it is stated that the ROC proposes to remove/strike off the name of the Company from the Register of Companies and dissolve them unless a cause is shown to the contrary, wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2013 for the purpose of striking off the name of the company from the Register maintained by the ROC. However, the Appellant in the facts of the Appeal stated that the Appellant company for the financial year 2013-14 to 2018-19, the financial statements were prepared on time and duly approved in the respective Annual General Meetings by the shareholders, but the same could not be filed within the respective time frames due to clerical oversight on the part of the legal consultants and that there was no intentional delay in the filings of e-Forms on part of the appellant company. 13. The Appellant Company failed to state that the company was carrying on its business prior to issuance of show cause notice. However, the Appellant company sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
