TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of company s status from Strike off to Active (for e-filing) and to intimate the bankers about the restoration of the name of the company so as to defreeze its accounts - Application allowed. - CA/106/KOB/2020 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2021 - Shri Ashok Kumar Borah, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant : Ms. Raveena Naz, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent : No appearance ORDER This Company Appeal No. CA/106/KOB/2020 has been filed under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, (hereinafter called as the Act ) by M/s COCHIN MEDIA CITY LIMITED (hereinafter called as the Appellant Company ), represented by its Director Mr. Jerit Venugopal,seeking a direction to the Registrar of Companies, Kochi (hereinafter called as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies Act has occurred on account of nonfiling of Financial Statements and Annual Returns. 4. The Appellant further stated that the Appellant Company has been active since incorporation and has also been maintaining all the requisite documentation, as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. The Appellant Company is carrying business in entertainment and related activities for past 14 years. Due to inadvertence and oversight relating to the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 the Appellant failed to submit the relevant Annual Returns and Financial Statements with the ROC within the stipulated time. The delay in filing the Annual Returns and Annual Forms was accidental and it occurred due to clerical oversight on the part of the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Act, 2013 Annual Returns for 2015, 2016 and 2017 were due to be filed on or before 30.11.2015, 30.11.2016 and 30.11.2017 respectively. ROC further stated that the subject company has violated the provisions of Sections 92/137 of the Companies Act, 2013, as the case may be. 8. In the Report of ROC, it is further stated that notice under Section 248 (1) of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 3 of Companies (Removal of names of Companies from Register of Companies) Rules 2016, had been issued to the Company and its Directors on 17.05.2018 giving 30 days notice. It is also stated that due process has been meticulously followed for strike off action of the Company. As per requirements of Section 248 read with Rule 7 of Companies (Remo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Years 2007-2008 to 2016-2017 and 2018-2019. 11. The provision pertaining to the restoration of the name of the Company as provided in Section 252 (3) is reproduced below: Section 252(3): (3) If a company, or any member or creditor or workman thereof feels aggrieved by the company having its name struck off from the register of companies, the Tribunal on an application made by the company, member, creditor or workman before the expiry of twenty years from the publication in the Official Gazette of the notice under sub-section (5) of section 248 may, if satisfied that the company was, at the time of its name being struck off, carrying on business or in operation or otherwise it is just that the name of the company be restored to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Directors of the Company and to allow for filing of the Annual Returns and Financial Statements by the Company to restore the name of the Company. IV. The Shareholders/Directors of the Appellant Company shall jointly submit an undertaking to the Registrar of Companies stating therein that the accounts of the Company were not used as means to transact tainted money during the period of demonetization. V. The Appellant is directed to pay the costs of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to the PM CARES FUND and proof of payment be handed over to Registrar of Companies, Kerala within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order, while submitting the documents, failing which this order will lapse. VI. The Company s re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
