9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lay bestowing wider and liberal construction. The Courts are to examine as to whether the party seeking such benefit under such exemption notification is found to be entitled to such benefits or not. In case, a party is found to be eligible within the conditions prescribed, the notification is to be construed liberally. In contradistinction thereto, if a party is found to be ineligible as per the conditions prescribed, the notification is to be construed strictly. All that is to be seen is the legislative intent or the economic justification behind such notification. A perusal of the CFSS 2020 dated 30th March, 2020 reveals that the benefit of exemption from charging additional fees and grant of immunity from launching prosecution on account of delay associated with certain filings was notified in respect of only those companies which were not in the excepted category as per sub clause (ix) (a) of clause 6 thereof. It is also apparent that the said benefit was to come into force with effect from 1st April, 2020 to 30th September, 2020. The scheme envisages entitlement to companies, whose restoration orders were passed between 1st December, 2020 and 31st December, 2020. It is an und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tition bearing W.P.(C) 5803/2020 challenging the notification dated 29th October, 2019 seeking restoration of its name in the RoC. While that writ petition was pending, the respondents floated another Scheme dated 15th January, 2021 called Scheme for Condonation of Delay for Companies restored on the Register of Companies between 01 December 2020 and 31 December 2020 under section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 (for short extended CFSS 2020 ) for the purpose of condoning the delay in filing of certain documents with the RoC effective from 1st February, 2021. This Scheme was made applicable only to those Companies in respect of whom, an appeal has been filed under section 252 of the Act with the respective National Company Law Tribunal (for short NCLT ) Bench seeking restoration of their names and was disposed of between 1st December, 2020 and 31st December, 2020 with an order for restoration of the name of the company. Thus, all such Companies were entitled for benefits extended under the extended CFSS 2020. 4. In the meanwhile, learned Single Judge vide the order dated 11th February, 2021 disposed of the writ petition bearing W.P.(C) 5803/2020 directing the name of the appellant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... off from the RoC by virtue of a speaking order under section 248 of the Act, the appellant could not file its appeal before the NCLT and instead had filed the W.P.(C) 5803/2020. Merely because the appellant had no choice other than to file a writ petition challenging the striking of its name from the RoC instead of approaching the NCLT, cannot be a reason to disentitle the appellant from the benefits of extended CFSS 2020 . In support of the aforesaid contention, learned counsel for appellant also refers to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in AGD.P. Ltd. vs. Registrar of Companies, 2018 SCC OnLine Mad 13818 . He states that the learned Division Bench had observed that an application under section 252 (3) of the Act can be entertained by NCLT only where there is an order by which the name of the company is struck off. 8. He submits that CFSS 2020 was initially brought into force vide the letter dated 30th March, 2020. He states that the respondents had granted exemption to defaulting companies from payment of additional fees as also immunity from launching prosecution or proceedings for imposing penalty on account of delay in certain filings. He further su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 11th February, 2021 in W.P.(C) 5803/2020 to submit that the restoration of the name of the appellant in the RoC was directed on the said date, whereas the extended CFSS 2020 was applicable only to the orders of restoration passed by NCLT with effect from 1st December, 2020 to 31st December, 2020. According to her, by the time the name of the appellant was restored, the period of eligibility stipulated in extended CFSS 2020 expired and the scheme was no more available to the appellant. She prays that the present appeal therefore, be dismissed. 13. In rejoinder, learned counsel for appellant submits that in the absence of a proper speaking order as envisaged under section 248(6) of the Act, the appellant could not file an appeal before the NCLT under section 252 of the Act. He states that such preclusion cannot come in the way of the appellant seeking benefits of extended CFSS 2020 particularly when similar benefits have been granted to all those companies who had obtained restoration orders from the NCLT. According to him, this would be an apparent discrimination. 14. He also submits that the appellant even otherwise is entitled to benefits as envisaged under section 460 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d such notification. It would be apposite to refer to the judgement of the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Wood Papers Ltd., (1990) 4 SCC 256 wherein it was held as under:- 4. Entitlement of exemption depends on construction of the expression any factory commencing production used in the Table extracted above. Literally exemption is freedom from liability, tax or duty. Fiscally it may assume varying shapes, specially, in a growing economy. For instance tax holiday to new units, concessional rate of tax to goods or persons for limited period or with the specific objective etc. That is why its construction, unlike charging provision, has to be tested on different touchstone. In fact an exemption provision is like an exception and on normal principle of construction or interpretation of statutes it is construed strictly either because of legislative intention or on economic justification of inequitable burden or progressive approach of fiscal provisions intended to augment State revenue. But once exception or exemption becomes applicable no rule or principle requires it to be construed strictly. Truly speaking liberal and strict construction of an exemption provision are to be invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same is applicable only to those companies in respect of whom the NCLT, in appeals filed under section 252 of the Act, has passed orders for restoration of the names and disposed of those appeals between 1st December, 2020 and 31st December, 2020. It is observed that in respect of those Companies alone, no additional fees were payable. Learned counsel for the appellant would have us replace the reference to NCLT with the Delhi High Court and made an endeavour to read the para 2 of the extended CFSS 2020 in that light and attempted to make it applicable to the appellant. We have, for the sake of assumption, considered the replacement as contended. In our considered opinion, even if we read Delhi High Court in place of NCLT , the benefit of exemption notification under extended CFSS 2020 shall still not be available to the appellant. This is for the reason that the scheme envisages entitlement to companies, whose restoration orders were passed between 1st December, 2020 and 31st December, 2020. It is an undoubted fact that the restoration of the name of the appellant was directed vide the order dated 11th February, 2021 in W.P.(C) 5803/2020. Thus, in view of the fact that the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
