TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons including adverse market conditions, financial issues etc. The documents relied upon by the Appellant unmistakably demonstrate that the Appellant Company is a living entity. This Tribunal has examined the relevant provision applicable for restoration of the name of the company as provided in Section 252 of the Companies Act 2013 and as per the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be in the interest of the Company, its Shareholders and Creditors, the name of the Company be ordered to be restored by this Bench while exercising its jurisdiction U/s 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rules made thereunder - The provisions pertaining to restoration of the name of the company has been provided in Section 252 of the Companies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER Rajesh Dayal Khare, J. (Member (J)) 1. The present appeal is filed by the Appellant U/s 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 87A of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 for restoration of name of Sidhant Career Concepts Private Limited struck off by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh U/s 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016, from the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh. 2. Facts of the appeal are stated as under: i. The Appellant Company Sidhant Career Concepts Private Limited was originally incorporated on 14.08.2012 with the Registrar of Companies, Uttar Pradesh having ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant Company were lost on 8th March, 2010 by employee of the Company while transfer of the documents. Further, it was submitted that the Appellant Company has made compliances of Income Tax with the competent authorities and has certain assets which necessitate restoration of its name in the record of RoC. 3. Upon notice being issued to the Respondent, ROC have filed their counter and stated that the name of the company was struck off after duly complying with the provisions of 248 of Companies Act, 2013 Read with Rule 3 of the companies (Removal of names of Companies from Register of companies) rules 2016 after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. No reply to the said Show Cause notice dated 21.05.2018 was received from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e. the financial statements and Annual returns up to date and shall continue to do so in future. 7. Lastly, the Appellant has filed an affidavit to this effect that it is not a shell company nor carried out any unusual transactions in its bank account during the period of Demonetization. 8. I have heard the argument of the Counsel for both the parties and perused the documents submitted by the Appellant. It is not in controversy that the Appellant Company has not filed its Annual Return and Balance Sheet with RoC. Moreover, the dispute regarding Nil turnover of the company is also taken into consideration, but failure on the part of the Appellant and its Directors to adhere to the statutory compliances and also Nil turnover of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow restoration on grounds of its failure to file annual returns would be neither just nor equitable. As per several decisions of various courts it should only be an exceptional circumstance that court should refuse restoration where the company has been struck off for its failure to file annual return as that would be excessive or inappropriate penalty for that oversight. 12. Accordingly, it is therefore 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 Registrar of Companies and take all consequential actions such as change of Company's status from 'Strike Off' to 'Active' (for e-filing), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
