Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2019 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 342 - AT - Companies LawStriking the name of the company from the register of companies - non-compliance with the requirement of sending a notice to the company and all the directors of the company of his intention to remove the name of the company from the register of the companies - Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- Sub-section (1) of Section 248 of Companies Act, 2013 provides that where the Registrar has reasonable cause to believe that a company is not carrying on any business of operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years and has not made any application within such period for obtaining the status of dormant company under Section 455 then he shall send a notice to the company and all the directors of the company of his intention to remove the name of the company from the register of companies and requesting them to send their representation alongwith the copies of relevant documents within 30 days from the date of notice. Admittedly ROC has served notice dated 17.3.2017 to company’s registered address which returned unserved. In the notice name of company’s directors i.e. Appellant No.2 and 3 and their address are mentioned, however, no notice have been sent to them by the ROC. It is true that in the notice dated 17.3.2017 which was sent to company it is mentioned “that the notice is also treated as having been served on the directors of the company in terms of the provisions of Section 20 of the Companies Act, 2013” - this is not the compliance of mandatory provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 248 of Companies Act, 2013 and the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016. Due to non-compliance of this provisions the appellants could not send their representations alongwith relevant documents before the ROC. Before passing the order ROC has not recorded his satisfaction as per provisions under sub-section (6) of Section 248 of Companies Act, 2013 - The name of the appellant No.1 company shall be restored to the Register of Companies subject to conditions imposed.
|