TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irected to restore the original status of the petitioner company as if the name of the Company had not been struck off from the register of Companies with the resultant. Application allowed. - C.P No.13/GB/2021 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2021 - HON BLE MR. H. V SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (J) And HON BLE MR. PRASANTA KUMAR MOHANTY, MEMBER (T) A.S. SINGH ADVOCATE PETITIONER PRESENT ORDER [Per: Shri Prasanta Kumar Mohanty. Member (T)] 1. The Present appellant through this company appeal has sought for restoration of name of the company, i.e. M/S Elangbam Infrastructures Construction Private Limited in the Register of Companies being maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Guwahati. [The ROC for short]. The names of Company struck off from the statutory Register vide impugned order of the ROC on 04.11.2019. 2. Being aggrieved with impugned action, the appellant, as being Shareholder/ Director of the above company, has prayed for following relief(s): A) Restore the name of the Company in the Register of the Companies as maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Guwahati. B) Any other order as the Tribunal deems fit and proper in the best interest of the stakeholders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Petitioner Company has been active since incorporation and has also been maintaining all the requisite documentation, as per the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. 9. The petitioner submits that the petitioner company did not receive any show cause notice, nor was it afforded any opportunity of being heard before the aforesaid action was taken by the Opp. Party. 10. The Petitioner also submitted that the accounts of the petitioner company were prepared and audited by a Chartered Accountant engaged by the company to perform the task of filing the returns with the office of the Registrar of Companies and who didn t file the same and also did not reveal this fact to the Directors of the Petitioner company. It is further submitted that it was only in April 2019, when the fact of non-filing of the returns and other documents with the opposite Party, as well as the fact that the petitioner company s name had been struck off from the Register maintained by the Opposite Party, was known to the petitioner company. 11. It is submitted that the object of Section 252(3) of the Companies Act is to give a chance to the company, its members and creditors to revive the company wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion i.e. on 13.03.2014. The appellants are also directors in the struck off company and disqualified under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 for the period from 01.11.2018 to 31.10.2023. 2. In exercise of the power conferred upon the Registrar of Companies under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013, the Registrar can strike off the name of a Company from its register after complying with certain formalities as provided by the said section when he has reasonable cause to believe that the company is not carrying on business or in operation. 3. The competent authority has struck off the name of the petitioner Company under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 since he had reasonable cause to believe that the M/s Elangbam Infrastructure Construction Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company ) was not carrying any business since incorporation. 4. It is evident from the records that the Company has not filed its Balance Sheet since its incorporation with the office of the respondent. As per Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, a struck off company can be restored only on the direction of the Hon ble NCLT within a period of three (3) years from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted. It is submitted that activation of the company does not entitles the right of activation of DIN of the disqualified directors. 8. Further, it is submitted that in the matter of disqualification of directors, the Hon ble High Court at Bombay passed an order dated 22.03.2018 in various Writ Petitions and quashed the operation of the impugned list of disqualification of directors published by ROC, Maharashtra, Mumbai. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, ROC, Mumbai has filed SLP (c) No. 18693 to 18703/2018 before the Hon ble Supreme Court. In the aforesaid SLP, the Hon ble Supreme Court vide order dated 06.08.2018 stayed the operation of the order passed by the Hon ble High Court at Bombay. In view of the above, any plea of the petitioner for activation of the DIN of the directors of the company should not be allowed. 9. Accordingly, it is submitted that this Hon ble NCLT on being satisfied that the Company was in operation at the time of striking off the name of the Company if at all, directs the respondent to restore the name of the Company, then there may be a direction upon the petitioners to make up to date filing of all statutory documents and to make all legal complian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view that it would be just and equitable to revive the name of the company M/S Elangbam Infrastructures Construction Private Limited in the statutory register as being maintained by the Registrar of Companies, Guwahati. 20. In exercise of the powers conferred on the Tribunal under section 252(3) of the Companies Act 2013, the present appeal is partly and conditionally allowed with directions and subject to the compliance of following conditions: 19.1) The Registrar of Companies, NER, Assam, the respondent herein, is directed to restore the original status of the petitioner company as if the name of the Company had not been struck off from the register of Companies with the resultant and consequential actions like changing status of petitioner company from struck off to Active ; 19.2) The petitioner company is directed to file all pending statutory documents(s) including Annual Accounts and Annual returns for the Financial Years 2014-15; 2015-16; 2016-17; 2017-18; 2018-19 2019-20, I.T returns along with prescribed fees/additional fee/fine as decided by Registrar of Companies, Assam; 19.3) The Company s representative who has filed the Company appeal on behalf of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
