Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (12) TMI 896

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 and 2018-19. Despite sufficient evidence placed before it, the NCLT failed to consider the same on merits. Even though the law provides for striking off the name of the Company for non-complying the statutory requirement as stipulated under Section 248 Companies Act, 2013, the statute also provides Section 252 of the Act to prefer an Appeal to the Tribunal by the aggrieved person against such dissolution of the Company. The Appellant rightly exercised its jurisdiction under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 before the NCLT. This Tribunal is of the opinion that the removal of the name of the company from the Register of Companies is not justified. There is no other ground except as mentioned in the notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubmitted that the Appellant filed the Application before the NCLT under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of name of the Appellant Company in the Register maintained by the ROC, West Bengal. 4. It is submitted that the ROC, West Bengal issued notice under Sub-section (1) and (4) of Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 in Form STK-5 dated 29.06.2018 whereby it is stated that the companies as mentioned in Annexure-A have 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 for obtaining the status of dormant company under Section 455 of the Companies Act, 2013. Further it is stated that it proposes to remove/st .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... olkata and the Company is in operation since its incorporation as per the objectives of the Appellant s Articles of Association. The Company duly filed the Annual Returns, Balance Sheet and Income Tax Returns for the Financial Years prior to and till 31.03.2013. However, due to unavoidable circumstances the Appellant Company inadvertently delayed in performing statutory compliances in accordance with the Companies Act for the Financial Years 2015-16 and 2016-17. 9. It is submitted that the Appellant Company is a functional and carrying out operations and activities and also paid Income Tax Returns for the Financial Year 2017-18 prior to issuance of notice under sub-section 4 of Section 248 dated 29.06.2018. The Company also filed balance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e parties, perused the pleadings and documents. The short point for consideration is whether the Appellant has made out any ground to allow the Appeal as prayed for. 15. On the facts relating to incorporation and filing of statutory compliances till 31.03.2015, it is not in dispute. The ROC, West Bengal issued notice under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, by which almost 10,650 companies are shown that they are in default. Further, as per the said Annexure- A the only reason shown that the Companies as mentioned in Annexure-A have 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 for obtaining the status of dormant compa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r Section 248 Companies Act, 2013, the statute also provides Section 252 of the Act to prefer an Appeal to the Tribunal by the aggrieved person against such dissolution of the Company. The Appellant rightly exercised its jurisdiction under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 before the NCLT. This Tribunal is of the opinion that the removal of the name of the company from the Register of Companies is not justified. Under Section 252 of the Act, the NCLT can exercise its power to restore the name of the Company, upon considering that the ROC passed the order striking off the name of the company from the Register, in absence of any sufficient grounds as specified in Section 248, provided an opportunity to be afforded to the Registrar and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates