TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cluding adverse market conditions, financial issues etc. The documents relied upon by the Appellant unmistakably demonstrate that the Appellant Company is a living entity. The Appellant has been able to satisfy this bench that it has certain assets which necessitate and justify the restoration of its name in the Register of Companies. A step as stringent as what has been taken at least requires an opportunity to the appellant to take remedial measures. Merely to disallow restoration on grounds of its failure to file annual returns would neither be 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 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... PTC031512. ii. The Appellant Company is involved in business of purchase, acquire, taken on lease, in alike nature of wok since its incorporation. The same is mentioned in the Memorandum of Association of the Company. iii. Appellant submitted that the Registrar of Companies (Respondent herein) vide Public Notification dated 22.05.2010, struck off the Appellant Company's name due to default in statutory compliances w.r.t filing of Financial Statements and Annual Returns, thus giving the status of a Dormant Company u/s 455(1) of Companies Act, 2013. iv. Appellant also stated that the Company has been active since its incorporation and had continuously maintained all the financial accounts including financial statements and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Company was struck off. Afterwards, the Appellant received mail on 05.07.2017 from RoC, intimating that Form SH-7 has been treated as invalid and transaction has been cancelled by RoC as the Company's name has been struck off. Hence this appeal. 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 (he 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 01.02.2010 was received from the Company or its Directors. Further stated that ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame of the Company in the Register maintained by the Registrar of Companies, the Appellant shall file all the outstanding statutory documents i.e. the Financial statements and Annual returns up to date and shall continue to do so in future. 7. Heard the rival sides and perused the record. 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 Company is attributed to a variety of reasons including adverse market conditions, financial issues etc. The documents relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inappropriate penalty for that oversight. 11. Accordingly, 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), restoration of status of DIN etc. 12. The Appellant Company is directed to file all the statutory document(s) along with prescribed fees/additional fee/fine as decided by RoC within thirty days from the date on which its name is restored on the Register of Companies by the RoC. 13. The restoration of the Company's name is also subject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
