Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2018 (9) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 335 - Tri - Companies LawRestoration of the name of the company as been struck off by the respondent - Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) sought restoration for the purpose of proceedings under the Income Tax Act - Held that:- Since the revenue has been seriously prejudiced by the act of fraud played by the company and its directors by filing a false declaration while seeking striking off with the respondent and by also not filing the necessary income tax returns and making a full disclosure of its affairs with the office of the appellant from the relevant assessment years being 2009-10 to 2013 which it had an onus or legal duty to perform and both of which are evident from the investigation carried out by SFIO, the appellant is to be treated as “an aggrieved person' entitled to maintain the present appeal. This Tribunal also fails to understand as to how the respondent despite the report of SFIO clearly pointing out that accommodation entries had been perpetrated by the company and its directors in cahoots with the others named in the report of investigation and which is not in co-relation with the details furnished in the application and the declaration and certificate in support thereof establishing prima-facie incorrect information had been furnished in the application leading to passing of the order of striking off by the respondent is opposing the restoration of the name of the Company filed by the appellant. Based on the SFIO report, the respondent in view of the incorrect information furnished by the company and its directors inducing the respondent to strike off the name of the company in the first place should have filed an application as contemplated under 2nd proviso to Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking for restoration of the name of the company and in the circumstances we do not find any merit in the objections which are only technical and as raised by the respondent/Registrar of Companies, particularly to the effect that if the name of the company is restored there will not be any Board and nobody will be answerable. It is for the respondent to go after the perpetrators of the fraud and to bring them before law for which it is sufficiently armed under the Companies Act, 2013 itself and hence it cannot be projected as ground for rejection of the appeal. This Tribunal orders the restoration of the name of the Company, M/s Motiram Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. in the Register of the Companies as maintained by the Registrar of Companies forthwith in order to enable the revenue to exercise its right as against the Company which had been struck off based on the false statements filed before the RoC namely the Respondent herein which vitiates the order dated 15.01.2015 and hence the order is set aside.
|