Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (1) TMI 873

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in the share capital by the Petitioner Company. There is no dispute that the authorized share capital was increased when the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 were in vogue and the petitioner was required to deposit fee along with documents / form in terms of the Rules, as in place then but the fact remains and also conceded by Mr. Chopra that the petitioner had filed the e-Form only in the year 2014 after the Rules of 2014 were framed. If that be so, the fee as payable under the said Rules (of 2014), need to be deposited by the petitioner, as it is clear from the reading of the Rules that it is the fee, as applicable at the time of actual filing of the documents / Forms, which were due to be filed under the Companies Act, 1956 shal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is a Company incorporated in the year 1989. In the year 2010, the petitioner Company increased its authorized share capital pursuant to a preferential allotment. Similar increase was made in the years 2012 and 2013 pursuant to bonus issue. 3. It is the case of the petitioner and contended by Mr. Chopra that it had taken approval in the respective extraordinary General Meetings and Annual General Meetings and it complied with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 except that in respect of increased authorized share capital it did not file Form 5 with the respondent No.3. He submits that the non-filing of the said Form was neither deliberate nor intentional but due to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eir counter affidavit:- 1. That the petitioner company namely Visesh Infotecnics Limited having CIN L30007DL1989PLC131190 was incorporated on 20.01.1989 and presently its Registered Office is situated at 703, Arunachal Building, 19 Barakhamba Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi 110001. 2. That as per records available the petitioner company passed the Special resolution dated 03.09.2010 in regard to increase of its Authorized Share Capital pursuant to preferential allotment by issuing of Twenty Two Crore warrants convertible into equal number of equity shares of ₹ 10 each at ₹ 10 on preferential Basis to promoters and non-promoters in the year 2010 wherein the registration of Special Resolution of same was submitted with the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thin thirty days pursuant to Section 95, 97, 94A(2) and 81(4) of the Companies Act, 1956. Simultaneously, Section 64 (1) of the Companies act, 2013 inter-alia stipulates that the company shall file a notice in the prescribed form (new SH-7) with the Registrar of Companies within a period of 30 days of such alternations. However the petitioner had not fulfilled the statutory compliance of filing E-form 5 (Now e-form SH-7 as per Companies Act 2013) with the answering respondents till date. 5. That the rules relating to Companies (Registration of Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014 has been implemented w.e.f 01.04.2014 after the draft rules have been placed before the stakeholders and finalized after due deliberations. It is pertinent to mention .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that there is no dispute that the authorized share capital was increased when the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 were in vogue and the petitioner was required to deposit fee along with documents / form in terms of the Rules, as in place then but the fact remains and also conceded by Mr. Chopra that the petitioner had filed the e-Form only in the year 2014 after the Rules of 2014 were framed. If that be so, the fee as payable under the said Rules (of 2014), need to be deposited by the petitioner, as it is clear from the reading of the Rules that it is the fee, as applicable at the time of actual filing of the documents / Forms, which were due to be filed under the Companies Act, 1956 shall be payable. So it is the fee as in vogue on t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates