TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eration that it is just to do so, can restore the name of the Company in the Register and in the interest of all stakeholders, including the Appellant itself, who seeks restoration of the name of the Company in the register maintained by Registrar of Companies, the company deserved to be restored. The Public Notice of Registrar of Companies striking off the name of the company is set aside. The restoration of the company's name to the Register of Registrar of Companies is ordered subject to its filing of all outstanding documents with proper filing fees along with additional fees required under law and completion of all formalities, including payment of any late fee or any other charges which are leviable by the respondent for the la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- divided into 10,000/- equity shares of ₹ 10/- each. 3. The main objects of the company are: To acquire, sell, transfer, subscribe, and hold debentures, shares, bonds, properties and other assets of companies constituted and carrying on business in India or elsewhere. and other main objects. 4. A notice no. ROC-DEL/248(1)/STK-5/2019/3789 dated 09.08.2019 was issued by the Registrar of Companies that the company has not been carrying on any business or operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years and have not made any application within such period of obtaining the status of dormant company under Section 455. The name of the company was struck off in terms of provision of Section 248 su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransactions and a closing balance of ₹ 10,39,554.03/- 6. The public notice was published by the ROC-Delhi, at the website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs, wherein the name of the Appellant Company was mentioned. The said was also served on the appellant company vide email dated 23.11.2019. The ROC proposed to remove/ strike off the name of the appellant company unless a cause has been shown to the contrary within 30 days from the said Public notices. 7. The appellant states that no notice under section 248(5) of the Act in the form of STK-7 was served through physical mode to the Company or any of the directors of the company on their behalf and were not afforded any opportunity of being heard before striking off of the name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Companies Act, 2013. 11. The Registrar of Companies has stated that it has no objection if the name of the Company is restored on proving by the Company that it was carrying on business or was in operation and the Company be also directed to file financial statements up to date with appropriate filing and additional fees. 12. The appellant has filed rejoinder to the reply field by the ROC and raised the following contentions with regards the imposition of cost: a) There was no legal basis for striking off the name of the appellant company and the mandated procedure was not followed. b) The appellants have relied upon the following cases: i. Appeal (AT) No. 76 of 2019 decided on 29.05.2019 of Hon'ble NCLAT, Chandrashek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... restoration of the name of the Company in the register maintained by Registrar of Companies, the company deserved to be restored. 16. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The Public Notice of Registrar of Companies striking off the name of the company is set aside. The restoration of the company's name to the Register of Registrar of Companies is ordered subject to its filing of all outstanding documents with proper filing fees along with additional fees required under law and completion of all formalities, including payment of any late fee or any other charges which are leviable by the respondent for the late filing of statutory returns, and also subject to payment of cost of ₹ 25,000/- to be paid to Prime Minister's Reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
