TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment Years 2008-09 to 2017-18, which demonstrated significant accounting transactions during the aforesaid period. The only conclusion deducible from this documentary evidence and unhesitatingly accepted by the Respondent ROC is that Matrix Power had been carrying on business and was in operation during the relevant period. It being admitted by ROC that the accounting transactions undertaken by the company qua its avowed objective were significant, the business being carried on by the company cannot be termed cosmetic or inconsequential. What stares in the face of impugned order is the fact that the Tribunal has overlooked the factum of the significant accounting transactions admittedly undertaken by the company during the releva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aw Tribunal at Chennai (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal ) declined to restore the name of M/s Matrix Power Controls India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Matrix Power ) on the Register of Companies for failure to file the returns with the ROC from financial year 2009 onwards. The impugned order is challenged primarily on the ground that the Registrar of Companies (hereinafter referred to as ROC ) has improperly exercised jurisdiction under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) and the Tribunal failed to notice that the parameters set out in Section 252(3) of the Act had been satisfied by the Matrix Power. 2. It is not in controversy that Matrix Power incorporated as a Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom 2009 onwards and there was no documentary proof that the statutory compliances had been made. 3. Reiterating its stand taken before the Tribunal, ROC has filed its report stating therein that consequent upon failure of Matrix Power to file annual return and balance sheet subsequent to financial year 2008-2009, ROC initiated action under Section 248 of the Act against the Matrix Power and the name of the Matrix Power was struck off from the Register of Companies because as per records of ROC neither the company was carrying any operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years nor did it apply within such period to obtain the status of a Dormant Company. It is further stated that the procedure in term ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name of company improperly struck off by the ROC merely for failure to file the annual returns. Learned counsel for the Respondent, confronted with the report of ROC submitted that the fact that the Income Tax Statements were consistently filed by the Company shows that the Company was aware of legal compliances, yet choose to neglect filing of annual returns and financial statements in terms of provisions of the Act. It is submitted that no explanation has been offered for such non-compliance. 6. Having bestowed our consideration to the factual matrix of the case, it is abundantly clear that Matrix Power has been struck off the Register of Companies on the ground of non-filing of financial statements and annual returns for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Company within the ambit of Section 248 of the Act. What stares in the face of impugned order is the fact that the Tribunal has overlooked the factum of the significant accounting transactions admittedly undertaken by the company during the relevant period justifying no conclusion other than the one that the company was in operation and carrying on business. Ironically the ROC, while admitting this factual proposition, sought to strike off the name of the company from its register ignoring and shutting out the vital evidence though in its report before the Tribunal as also before this Appellate Tribunal such proposition of fact is pleaded and reiterated. It is therefore safe to conclude that removal of name of the company from the Reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
