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

2023 (2) TMI 380

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the Balance Sheets of the Company for the Financial Years Year 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 2018-19 and Income Tax Returns of the Company for the Financial Years 2016-17, 2017-18 2018-19 shows that the Appellant Company is having substantial movable as well as immovable assets. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Appellant Company is not carrying on any business or operations - Hence, the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (Mumbai Bench, Court-II) as well as Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai is not sustainable in law. The name of the Appellant Company be restored to the Register of Companies subject to the compliances fulfilled - appeal allowed. - Company Appeal ( AT ) No. 130 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 9-2- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... purposes other than the purpose/object for which the company was originally incorporated. It also puts a burden on the company to comply with various regulatory/statuary compliances. Considering the above facts and circumstances, practical aspects, the Bench has not found any justifiable/reasonable grounds to interfere with the action taken by the Government of India/ROC in striking off names of Lakhs of companies including the petitioner company. 2. The facts giving rise to this Appeal are as follows: i) The Appellant as a Director of Venice marketing and Finance Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company ) was incorporated on 27.11.1990 and struck off by the Respondent on 12.09.2018. The company has done its r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant during the course of argument and grounds mentioned in his memo of Appeal submitted that striking off the name of the Appellant Company done by the Respondent is completely contrary to the intent of Section 248(1) of the Act. However, the procedure adopted by the Respondent while doing the same is against the provisions of Section 248(1) because of which a fully functional company has been struck off against the very intent and purpose of the Act. The Respondent did not issue any notice under Section 248(1) of the Act which is mandatory in nature and a condition precedent before exercising the power of striking off under Section 248(5) of the Act. 4. It is further submitted that despite producing Ser .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the provisions of Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 and also in pursuance of the circulars issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi from time to time. The basis for striking off the name of the company was the continuous non-filing of the statutory returns (which are required to be filed under the Act) and company is not carrying on any business or operation for a period of two immediately preceding financial years and has not made any application within such period for obtaining the status of a dormant company under Section 455, prior to it struck off. The aforesaid situation has arisen due to inaction on the part of the Appellant Company and its Directors/Officers. The appropriate action taken by Resp .....

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, 2017-18 2018-19 and Income Tax Returns of the Company for the Financial Years 2016-17, 2017-18 2018-19 shows that the Appellant Company is having substantial movable as well as immovable assets. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Appellant Company is not carrying on any business or operations. Hence, we are of the view that the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (Mumbai Bench, Court-II) as well as Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai is not sustainable in law. 9. In view of the aforenoted, we set aside the impugned order dated 09.03.2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (Mumbai Bench, Court-II) in CP No. 1055/252(1)/MB/C-II/2020. The name of the Appellant Company be restored to the Re .....

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