|
Advanced Search Options
Companies Law - Case Laws
Showing 61 to 80 of 106 Records
-
2020 (10) TMI 396 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH
Approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation - Sections 230 and 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 and the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- Right to apply for the sanction of the Scheme has been statutorily provided under Section 230-234 of the Companies Act, 2013 and therefore, it is open to the applicant companies to avail the benefits extended by statutory provisions and the Rules - It has also been affirmed in the petition that the Scheme is in the interest of the transferor company and also the transferee company including their shareholders, creditors, employees and all concerned.
Upon considering the approval accorded by the members and creditors of the Petitioner companies to the proposed Scheme, and the report filed by the Regional Director, Northern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, report filed by the official liquidator and also as no objection from any quarter against the Scheme has been received; there appears to be no impediment in sanctioning the present Scheme - sanction is hereby granted to the Scheme under Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013.
The scheme is approved.
-
2020 (10) TMI 395 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI BENCH
Approval of the Scheme of Arrangement by way of Demerger - Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 and the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- Upon considering the approval accorded by the members and creditors of the Petitioner companies to the proposed Scheme, and the report filed by the Regional Director, Northern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the report filed by Income Tax Department and also as no objection from any quarter against the Scheme has been received; there appears to be no impediment in sanctioning the present Scheme - Consequently, sanction is hereby granted to the Scheme under Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013.
The scheme is sanctioned.
-
2020 (10) TMI 340 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Validity of action of the 3rd respondent-the Registrar of Companies in ordering inspection through the impugned notice - inspection of books and documents of the Company by an Inspector - HELD THAT:- In the instant case, the complaint is lodged by a person (4th respondent) who has been a director of the Company alleging oppression and mismanagement of the affairs of the Company besides questioning his removal as director of the Company unceremoniously, not noticing him of the annual general body meetings for three consecutive years, which according to the 2nd petitioner itself is made a ground for removal from the post of director of the Company, which the 4th respondent refutes and states that there was no annual general body conducted at all and the question of absenting himself on such occasions does not arise, are all matters to be examined by the respondent-authorities being statutory functionaries under the 2013 Act.
Whether there exists grounds in ordering inspection and the authorities are prima facie satisfied that there exists grounds for such an inspection? - HELD THAT:- It is to be seen that recording satisfaction to take action means to form an opinion which again is traceable to the nature of allegations against the person/Company or both. In this case respondents on even number of occasions received complaints from the 4th respondent alleging mis-management, oppression and fraudulent acts on the part of the 2nd petitioner, who has been the director of the Company, which itself are to be construed as the basis for forming opinion to record satisfaction for ordering inspection under Section 206 of the 2013 Act. Non recording of reasons for satisfaction in the order itself or if not manifestly appear from the order, is not fatal and the impugned order cannot be invalidated on that ground alone when the allegations are serious in nature touching upon the very functioning of the Company that too by a share holder group of 50% of the Company, now as per the orders of the NCLT, subject to orders the Appellate Tribunal. Admittedly, apart from the ROC, the Central Government (Ministry of Corporate Affairs) has the authority to direct the Registrar or an inspector appointed for the purpose, to initiate an inquiry into the affairs of the Company under Section 206(4) of the 2013 Act. The Central Government has the power to authorise any statutory authority to carry out the inspection of books of account of a company or class of companies by an order, general or special, under Section 206(5).
In a petition for prevention of oppression and mis-management and where there is a prayer to investigate into the affairs of the Company, though sometimes it is called a motivated complaint, if there are serious allegations made in it, there is no reason why inspection, inquiry be not ordered against such a Company. Section 206 of the 2013 Act corresponds to Sections 209A and 234 of the repealed Companies Act, 1956. Section 206 of the 2013 Act is a combination of Sections 209A and 234 of the Act 1956. The scope of sub-Sections (1) and (3) of Section 206 of the 2013 Act read together provides enlarged powers to the Registrar as compared to the provisions of the 1956 Act. The Central Government may pass order of inspection either by the Registrar or an Inspector or any statutory authority, appointed for this purpose under Section 206 of the 2013 Act - In the present case after initiation of action under Section 206, next step under Section 207 has already been undertaken which is subject matter in WP No. 12296 of 2019 and, therefore, cause in the writ petition, WP No. 10201 of 2017 which challenged the issuance of notice under Section 206 does not survive and almost has become infructuous. However, it is for the Central Government to take further steps in the matter under Section 208 after considering the inspection report submitted under Section 207. But the issue has not come to that stage as it is for the Central Government, on receipt of report of inspection, for the best reasons, to order investigation or not, as such the 2nd writ petition, WP No. 12296 of 2019 is also premature.
Petition dismissed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 339 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL — AHMEDABAD BENCH
Reduction of equity share capital - repayment of the fair value of the shares to the small equity shareholders - section 66 read with section 52 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- After the first hearing of the petition further clarifications were sought by this Tribunal vide order dated July 16, 2020. The further affidavit dated August 4, 2020 provided the detailed working of the valuation report as well as other clarifications sought. Having perused the petition and more particularly the reasons given in support of the proposed reduction, in our view there is no reason not to confirm the proposed action of the petitioner to reduce its capital. The said proposal does not prejudicially affect anyone. Accordingly the resolution dated January 28, 2020 is hereby confirmed.
It has been noticed by this Tribunal that a caveat was filed on behalf of some shareholder/s. The petitioner has confirmed the supply of copy of the application with all its annexures in the month of March. However, no further submissions have been forwarded by the said party even after the lapse of the prescribed period of 90 days for filing the objections.
Reduction of share capital allowed - application approved.
-
2020 (10) TMI 338 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL — MUMBAI— SPECIAL BENCH
Approval of composite scheme of arrangement - section 230-232 of the Companies Act - HELD THAT:- Directions issued for convening of various meetings - directions issued for service of notices - scheme approved - application allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 337 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH
Approval of Resolution Plan - Section 31(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT:- The parameters for approval of Resolution Plan are set out in Sections 30(2) and 31 of the IBC, 2016. The Resolution Plan under consideration has met with mandatory compliances.
The "Resolution Plan" is hereby approved which shall be binding on the Corporate Debtor and its employees, members, creditors, guarantors and other stakeholders involved in the Resolution Plan including the Resolution Applicants - While approving the Resolution Plan, as mentioned above, it is clarified that the Resolution Applicants shall pursuant to the Resolution Plan approved under Section 31(1) of the I&B Code, 2016, obtain all the necessary approval as may be required under any law for the time being in force within a period of one year from the date of approval of the Resolution Plan by this authority or within such period as provided for in such law.
Order of Moratorium shall cease to have effect - Resolution Plan approved.
-
2020 (10) TMI 336 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL — BENGALURU BENCH
Sanction the scheme of amalgamation - sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- It appears that the scheme will result in economies of scale, reduction in overheads, administrative, managerial and other expenditure and increase in operational rationalization, organizational efficiency, and optimal utilization of various resources, etc. On a consideration of the facts of the case as mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, which are not elaborated here again to avoid duplication and repetition, we are satisfied that the procedure specified in sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 has been complied with, and hence the scheme of amalgamation, as approved by the boards of both the transferor and transferee companies, can be sanctioned.
The scheme of amalgamation, as contained in the present petition, is hereby sanctioned and the appointed date shall be April 1, 2018 - application allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 335 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH
Direction to Respondent's Company to issue a share certificate - transfer of interest on the basis of will - Whether a person can transfer any interest on the basis of Will or not? - HELD THAT:- Section 213(1) of Indian Succession Act says that no right as executor or legatee can be established in any court of justice unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in India has granted probate of the Will under which the right is claimed, but sub-section 2 of the Section 213 says that this section is not applicable in case of a Will made by the Mohammadans and shall applicable only in the case of Will made by Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jain, where such Wills are of the class specified in Clause (a) and (b) or Section 57 of Indian Succession Act.
Territorial Jurisdiction - HELD THAT:- Decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court upon which the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner placed reliance is considered, and it is found that Hon'ble Madras High Court in a case P. Ranganathan and Others Vs. Sai Jagannathan and Others [1995 (8) TMI 339 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] considered the territorial jurisdiction of Saidapet and held that the property situated in Saidapet is outside the original territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court - in the light of that decision when we shall consider the case in hand then we find that here in the case in hand also the property is situated in Saidapet, which according to the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court is outside the original territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court.
Therefore, a combined reading of Sections 213 and 57 of the Act would show that where the parties to the Will are Hindus or the properties in dispute are not in territories falling u/s 57(a) and (b), Sub-section (2) of Section 213 of the Act applies and Sub-section (1) Section 213 of Indian Succession Act has no application. As a consequence, a Probate will not be required to be obtained in respect of a Will made outside those territories - Section 213(1) of the Indian Succession Act is not applicable, it is not necessary to grant a probate of the Will.
Thus, since the will is executed outside the original territorial jurisdiction of the Madras High Court, therefore, Section 57(a) of the Indian Succession Act read with Section 213(2) of the Indian Succession Act, it is not required to grant a probate, hence even if the Probate is not granted, a person can transfer any interest on the basis of Will.
Hence, the question is decided in affirmative - main case is listed for final hearing on 03.07.2020.
-
2020 (10) TMI 334 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BENCH
Rectification of mistake - applicant submit that upon reading of the entire decision dated 15.03.2017 r.w. order dated 26.04.2017 it can be seen that the name of the Respondent No. 3 in the order has been removed due to some inadvertence and such being a clerical error arising from accidental slip, needs recertification - HELD THAT:- Assuming there is some typographical error or accidental slip in the order which could not been brought to the notice of the Hon'ble NCLAT and Hon'ble Supreme Court. Then, even in the interest of justice, it cannot be done by us without having express permission/NOC from the appellate forum/s. Otherwise, in our humble view, it may tantamount to cause material alteration in the order which may change the purport of the order in appeal as passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble NCLAT. Hence, it is now no left open to this Court.
Application not maintainable and is liable to be rejected.
-
2020 (10) TMI 333 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
Prayer to Tribunal to dispose off Section 8 application - primordial grievance of the Appellants is that besides the Appellants having been aggrieved against the Impugned Order dated 14.02.2020, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench III, the Tribunal had not disposed of the Section 8 application pending on its file and instead passed the Impugned Order - HELD THAT:- On a careful perusal of the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 9400/19 dated 09.01.2020 [1779165] this Tribunal comes to resultant conclusion that the said Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is binding under Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Furthermore, the CA No. 422 of 2019 pending on the file of National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench Court No. III is directed by the Appellate Tribunal to be taken up by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, Court No. III on a day to day basis from 17.03.2020 without granting adjournments, and to dispose of the same within one week thereafter and to report compliance to this Tribunal. It is open to the respective parties to raise all factual and legal issues before the NCLT, New Delhi Bench III in CA No. 422 of 2019 and the said Adjudicating Authority shall take note of the same and to pass a reasoned order on merits, in accordance with Law.
The Registry is directed to list the matter on 31st March, 2020.
-
2020 (10) TMI 306 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Summon of accused to face trial for the offences punishable u/s 129 of Companies Act - HELD THAT:- From the very perusal of impugned summoning order it is apparent that the summoning has been made u/s 129 of Companies Act but neither the name of the accused has been given nor their parentage has been given nor the specific offence in which they been summoned is given. The complaint was with prayer for summoning accused persons for offences punishable u/s 129 of the Companies Act for making defiance of provisions of Section 129 of Companies Act and penal clause is there in Companies Act u/s 129(7) for making defiance against the provisions of section 129 of the Companies Act regarding financial statement. Hence request was made for making summoning of accused for offences punishable u/s 129(7) of the Act and it was with penal liability u/s 129(7) of the Act, but the Magistrate has summoned u/s 129 of the Companies Act without specifying penal provision u/s 129(7) of the Act. Hence it is prima-facie apparent that the Special C.J.M., Agra, was not careful to go through the complaint and relevant penal provision under which punishment was sought. Even names of accused persons with their parentage, who have been summoned, were not given nor contention of complaint is there nor any application of judicial mind is apparent from the impugned order.
Hence apparently there is non application of judicial mind by concerned Special C.J.M., Agra, in passing the impugned summoning order.
The impugned summoning order dated 27.2.2019 is being quashed with a direction to the court of Special C.J.M., Agra, to pass a judicial order in the matter - application allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 290 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH
Restoration of name of the Company in the Register of Companies, maintained by the Registrar of Companies - Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The ROC submitted that the action of striking off of the name of the Company was triggered due to negligence and lack of due diligence on the part of the directors of the Company for not discharging their statutory duties in filing the statutory returns within the due date stipulated under the Companies Act and also for not responding to the several periodical notices within the notice periods. Therefore, the action of strike off of the name of company is fully substantiated within the authority under the provisions of Section 248 of the Act and deserves the protection of this Tribunal.
The Registrar of Companies, the respondent herein, is ordered to restore the original status of the Appellant Company as if the name of the company has not been struck off from the Register of Companies and take all consequential actions like change of company’s status from ‘Strike off’ to Active (for e-filing) and to intimate the bankers about restoration of the name of the company so as to defreeze its accounts/
It is further observed that by virtue of this order of restoration of name of Company in the register it will not entitle the Directors of the Company whose name in case have been disqualified by virtue of provisions of section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 by the Respondent/RoC automatically to be restored to directorship except in accordance with law.
Application allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 278 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI BENCH
Approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation - Section 230 to 232 and other applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- The Official Liquidator sought to take on record and consider the report of the Chartered Accountant and has also sought to fix the remuneration payable to the Auditor who has Investigated into the affairs of the Transferor Company. In this regard, this Tribunal hereby directs the Transferor Company - 5 and Transferor Company - 6, jointly to pay a sum of ₹ 50,000/-to the Official Liquidator for the payment of fees payable towards the Auditor who has investigated into the affairs of the Transferor Companies.
Upon a query raised by this Tribunal in relation to the filing of this Petition by the Petitioner Companies under Section 230 - 232 of the Companies Act, 2013, since the Transferor Companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of the Transferee Company and as such why they have not filed the present Scheme under Section 233 of the Companies Act, 2013, the Learned AR for the Petitioner Companies submitted that the wholly owned subsidiary Companies i.e. the Transferor Companies are not solvent and as such they cannot comply with Section 233(1)(c) of Companies Act, 2013 and in the said circumstances, have filed the current petition for the approval of the Scheme under Section 230 - 232 of the Companies Act, 2013.
In view of absence of any other objections having been placed on record before this Tribunal and since all the requisite statutory compliances having been fulfilled, this Tribunal, sanctions the Composite Scheme of Arrangement, annexed as Annexure "E" with the Company Petitions as well as the prayer made therein - While approving the Scheme as above, it is clarified that this order should not be construed as an order in any way granting exemption from payment of stamp duty, taxes or any other charges, if any payment is due or required in accordance with law or in respect to any permission/compliance with any other requirement which may be specifically required under any law.
Petition allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 272 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH
Appointment of independent forensic auditor - HELD THAT:- After perusing the case records including the Order passed earlier on 17.01.2020 and 17.02.2020, the interim counter filed by the respondents, particularly the report of the Advocate Commissioner and the counter filed by the respondent Company against the Report, this Bench is of the view that the petition was filed under Section 241 and 242 of Companies Act and the reliefs sought for can only be available under the same sections of the Companies Act and cannot be granted under Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
This Tribunal pass the following order:
I. While considering the present situation to meet the ends of justice, this Tribunal allows the appointment of an Independent Forensic Auditor to complete the auditing work within 60 days from the date of appointment of the auditor by this Bench.
II. It is also directed to constitute an audit committee consisting of two directors from the Petitioner's side and two from the Respondent's side other than Respondent No. 2 for helping and co-operating in completing the independent audit.
III. The costs of the forensic auditor should be borne by both the parties equally. It is also directed both the parties to suggest the list of persons to perform as an Independent Forensic Auditor before 19.06.2020.
List the Company Petition on 22.06.2020, for suggesting list of auditors by both the parties.
-
2020 (10) TMI 231 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Principles of Natural Justice - short grievance of the Petitioner, who is an allotee of a flat in the project of Respondent No. 1, is that his application, under rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, has not been taken up by the NCLAT, and his claims have not been considered by the IRP - HELD THAT:- Irrespective of whether the Petitioner is an allottee or not, and whether the IRP issued notice to them or not, there can be no doubt that the Petitioner being an allottee would have to be heard by the NCLAT, before the settlement is finalised. For the said purpose, the Petitioner’s application, that has been filed before the NCLAT, ought to be heard at an early date, in order to ensure that before finalizing the terms of settlement and resolution plan, all allottees are heard and their grievances are properly addressed.
Accordingly, in terms of the order dated 13th March, 2020, the IRP shall file the terms of settlement before the NCLAT. The NCLAT shall hear the Petitioner and any other financial creditors and allottees, who may wish to make submissions in respect of the future course of action to be adopted - Upon hearing all the interested parties and addressing the grievances in accordance with law, NCLAT shall pass orders in respect of the settlement, which may be placed before it by the IRP. Until then, the terms of settlement and the further course of action, shall not be implemented by the company or by the IRP.
In view of the fact that there is urgency in this matter, it is directed that the applications filed by the Petitioner, and any other allottees or financial creditors, shall be listed before NCLAT, for hearing, on 12th October, 2020 - Petition disposed off.
-
2020 (10) TMI 230 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH
Oppression and mismanagement - approval of sale of shares - Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The Resolution of the IL & FS and its group companies was ordered by the Hon’ble NCLAT and a Resolution framework has been approved. Though the Resolution of the Company and its group entities is not strictly under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) the principle underlying the Code for Corporate Resolution of a Company is required to be kept in mind while going about the Resolution of the IL & FS and its group entities. The purpose of Resolution is to see that the Company and its assets are not wasted under an inefficient management. The Resolution aims at putting the Company and its group entities in better hands - True it is that the provisions of the Code would not be strictly applicable in the instant case, but the underlying object and principle thereof, in resolving a debt-ridden Corporate Debtor, cannot be lost sight of. The adherence to specific timeline for resolution is the essence, which in effect would bring about successful resolution of a beleaguered Company, like CPG or for that matter other entities in the IL & FS conglomerate.
The UoI represented by the Regional Director, MCA (WR), Mumbai has no objection to the divestment of IL & FS shares in CPG, as the same has been done in accordance with the approved Resolution Framework. On hearing the counsel for the Applicant in CA No. 1011 of 2020 as well as the Regional Director and having perused the pleadings and the documents attached thereto, we are satisfied and of the considered view that the sale of stake of IL & FS (59.18%) in CPG has been done within the Resolution Framework and the same needs to be approved and recorded.
Application disposed off.
-
2020 (10) TMI 229 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI BENCH
Sanction of Scheme of Amalgamation - Section 230-232 of Companies Act, 2013 and other applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 - HELD THAT:- Directions are issued with respect to calling, convening and holding of the meetings of the shareholders, secured and unsecured creditors or dispensing with the same as well as issue of notices including by way of paper publications - application allowed.
-
2020 (10) TMI 228 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH
Sanction of Scheme of Arrangement and Demerger - Sections 230 to 232 read with Section 66 and other applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- Notices for various meetings to be served - The authorities, who desire to make any representation under sub-section (5) of Section 230 shall send the same to this Tribunal with a copy of the same to be supplied to the Applicant Companies within a period of 30 (Thirty) days from the date of such service.
Application disposed off.
-
2020 (10) TMI 227 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH
Restoration of name of the Company in the Register of Companies, maintained by the Registrar of Companies - Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- The Registrar of Companies, Kerala, who is respondent herein has filed a Report stating that Chapter XVIII of the Companies Act, 2013 containing Section 248-252 which deals with removal of names of companies from the Register of Companies had been brought into force by the Central Government vide notification No. S.O.4167(E) on 26.12.2016. In exercise of powers conferred by Sub Sections (1), (2) & (4) of Section 248 read with Section 469 of the Companies Act, 2013 Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016 have also been brought into force by Central Government vide Notification No. GSR 1174E on 26.12.2016 - Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide communication dated 17.02.2017 had instructed all Regional Directors and Registrars of Companies to take strike off action against companies which have failed to file Financial Statements or Annual Returns for immediately two preceding Financial years and have also not filed application under Section 455 (1) of the Companies Act, 2013 for making them as “Dormant”.
It would be just and proper to order restoration of the name of the Company in the Register of Companies - The Company is directed to file all the statutory document(s) along with prescribed fees/additional fee/fine as decided by Registrar of Companies within 30 days from the date on which its name is restored on the Register of Companies by the Registrar of Companies. The appellant is directed to submit a declaration from the Directors regarding the deposit during the demonetization period with the Registrar of Companies - Dated the 31st day of January, 2020.
-
2020 (10) TMI 226 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH
Restoration of name of the Company in the Register of Companies, maintained by the Registrar of Companies - Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 - HELD THAT:- On 17-09-2019, this Bench directed to obtain the NOC from the Income Tax Department and notice was issued to the Tax Recovery Officer (Central), Income Tax Department, Ernakulam. Sufficient time was given to the appellant to obtain the same vide Orders dated 11.11.2019, 28.11.2019 and 30.12.2019 and on 16-01-2020, this Bench directed the appellant to file an affidavit to show that they will file all the pending Income Tax arrears due for the Assessment Years 2002-03 to 2008-09, once it is restored. On 17-01-2020, the appellant had filed an affidavit and stated that immediately upon restoration of the appellant Company, they shall file the Income Tax Returns with the Income Tax authorities and to make such filings up to date.
This Tribunal is of the opinion that it would be just and proper to order restoration of the name of the Company in the Register of Companies - Application disposed off.
Dated the 17th day of January, 2020.
|
