TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 518X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plicant Company as of date is carrying on the business for which it was incorporated and it is in operation and in the circumstances, it is just that the name of the Company should be restored on the Register of Companies as maintained by the Respondent. From the report filed by the Respondent, it is evident that the Applicant Company was struck off on 25.10.2019 and for the two years immediately preceding 25.10.2019, the Applicant company has placed sufficient documents to show that they were carrying business - Applicant Company has filed sufficient documents in order to demonstrate that the Company is active and carrying on the business and also in view of the fact that there is no significant objections raised by the Respondent ROC, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ICAL) For Applicant : Rabindra Kumar Samal, PCS For Respondent : K. Nikhil, AROC For Income Tax : None - appeared ORDER This is an Application filed by the Applicant in the capacity as a Shareholder of the Company viz. M/s RSN Infotech Private Limited , under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 aggrieved by the order of striking off passed by the Respondent under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 and seeking thereof to restore the name of the company in the Register maintained by the Respondent. 2. The Applicant has filed MA/616/2020 seeking for urgent listing of CA/ 195/2020 and for the reasons stated in the said application, MA/ 616/2020 stands allowed. 3. The Applicant Company was incorporated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vertence and as a result of which the Respondent has struck off the name of the Applicant Company from the Register maintained by them. 5. Throughout the averments made in the Application, the Applicant has not stated the date of issuance of public notice under Form No. STK - 5 and Form No. STK -7 by the Respondent, however it is averred in the Application that Form No. STK - 1 has been issued to the Company on 08.07.2019. 6. Upon notice to the Respondent, the Respondent viz. RoC, Coimbatore has filed its Report via email to the Registry of this Tribunal and it is stated in the Report that the Applicant Company was struck off from the Register on 25.10.2019. Apart from recording the statutory compliance which the Applicant Company s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the plea of the Applicant that the Applicant Company seeking for restoration of its name in the register as maintained by RoC is not seriously pressing the validity of the process undertaken by the RoC in striking off the name of the Applicant Company as envisaged under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with attendant Rules. However, the Applicant is seeking restoration of its name in the register as maintained by RoC by relying up on the ground that the Applicant Company as of date is carrying on the business for which it was incorporated and it is in operation and in the circumstances, it is just that the name of the Company should be restored on the Register of Companies as maintained by the Respondent. In order to sustain the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the Company, this Tribunal is of the view that the name of the Applicant Company is required to the restored in the Register maintained by the Respondent RoC. However, even though it will not absolve the Company from filing the necessary returns and documents and adhere to the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 as an onus is placed on the Company to strictly comply with the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 without any let, in the instant case the Company has demonstrated mitigating circumstances. 11. Thus, taking into consideration the provisions of Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 which vests this Tribunal with a discretion where the Company whose name has been struck off and such Company is able to demonstrate that there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ards other amounts as are required to be paid by the Company statutorily, the same shall be remitted by the Company. Any excess amount left after appropriating for all the above shall be meticulously returned by Respondent to the Appellant. (iii) Till all compliances are made by the Company, the Company shall not alienate or dispose of any of its valuable assets. (iv) It is further observed that by virtue of this order of restoration of the name of Company in the register it will not entitle the Directors of the Company whose names in case have been disqualified by virtue of provisions of Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 by the Respondent/RoC automatically to be restored to directorship except in accordance with law. (v) A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
