9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vity 'the Act') against the order of striking off the name of the company, passed by the Respondent under Section 248 (1) of the Act, issued vide bearing No. ROC/DELHI/248(5)/STK-7/2879 dated on 30.06.2017 by Registrar of Companies, the respondent herein. 2. The Appellant states that, the company was incorporated as a Private Limited Company with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana under the Companies Act, 1956 on 16.03.2010 with CIN U74900 DL2010 PTC200235, having its registered office situated at 301, Odeon Plaza-II, Plot No.- 13, Sector- 10, Central Market Dwarka, New Delhi, South West Delhi- 110075, within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. 3. The Authorized Share Capital of the company is Rs. 1,00,000/- divided into 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice bearing No. ROC/DELHI/248(5)/STK-7/2879 dated on 30.06.2017 (Company's name appearing at Sl. No. 14397) whereby name of 22864 companies have been struck off w.e.f. 07.06.2017 from the Registrar of Companies. 6. As per the ROC, Appellant had not filed its Annual Returns and Balance Sheet for the Financial Years since its Incorporation, thereby giving rise to the surmise that the business of the company was not in operation. Consequently, the name of the company was struck off in terms of provisions of Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 7 and Rule 9 of the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016. 7. The Appellant has brought forward the following documents about it being in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late filing fee as prescribed under the Companies Act, 2013. 9. The Income Tax Department has not filed any reply. 10. The grounds contemplated under section 252 of Companies Act, 2013, are that the company was carrying on business or was in operation at the time of striking off its name or where it appears "just" to the Adjudicating Authority that the name of the company is to be restored to the Register of Companies and the Section 252(1) further contemplates that one of the above three conditions are required to be satisfied before exercising jurisdiction to restore the company to its original name on the register of the Registrar of Companies. 11. The Appellant has submitted sufficient evidence that it has been in operation during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
