9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n preferred by the Appellant being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 28.12.2020 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (Cuttack Bench, Cuttack) in CP (Appeal) No. 252/CB/2020 whereby and whereunder appeal filed by the one of the Directors/Shareholders, Mr. Biswajit Karmakar, of the Struck Off Company- M/s BBC Developers Private Limited for restoration of the name of the Company in the Register maintained by the Registrar of Companies (RoC) was dismissed by the Tribunal. 2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal are as follows: i) The Appellant Company was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 25.04.2011 as a Private Limited Company with the office of Registrar of Companies, Orissa. The authorized share capital of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its incorporation i.e. 25.04.2011. The Appellant Company could not file Financial Statements and Annual Returns from Financial Year 2012-13 onwards due to management issues and inadvertence and business complexities. Moreover, the Company could not obtain professional advice as per the new Companies Act, 2013 because of inadvertence. All assets of the Company remained intact and it never became defunct. The accounts of the Company have been audited every year. iv) Further case is that on 07.07.2017, the Respondent published the Notice of striking off and Dissolution under Section 248(5) of the Act wherein the name of the Appellant Company was mentioned in the list of the companies whose name was to be struck off from the Register of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Company from the register of the Respondent which has not been followed in the present case. The Appellant Company neither received any show Cause Notice nor it afforded any opportunity of being heard before the action of striking off its name was taken by the Respondent. The Appellant only after receiving the Gazette notification came to know about its name being struck off from the Register of Respondent. Based on these submissions, the impugned order is set aside and the Appeal may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel for the Respondent during the course of argument and in his reply submitted that the Appellant Company was the continuous non-filing of the statutory returns i.e. financial statements and Annual Returns sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al) No. 252/CB/2020. The name of the Appellant Company be restored to the Register of Companies subject to the following compliances. i) Appellant shall pay costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one Lakh) to the Registrar of Companies, Odisha within 30 days. ii) After restoration of the Company's name in the Register maintained by the RoC, the Company shall file all their Annual Returns and Balances Sheets. The Company shall also pay requisite charges/fee as well as late fee/charges as applicable. iii) Inspite of present orders, RoC will be free to take any other steps punitive or otherwise under the Companies Act, 2013 for non-filing/late filing of statutory returns/documents against the Company and Directors. The instant Appeal is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
