TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany is not carrying on any business or operations. Hence, the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (New Delhi Bench, Court-II) as well as Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi Haryana is not sustainable in law. The name of the Appellant Company be restored to the Register of Companies subject to the compliances fulfilled - application allowed. - Company Appeal ( AT ) No. 164 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 20-2-2023 - [ Justice Anant Bijay Singh ] Member ( Judicial ) And [ Mr. Kanthi Narahari ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta , Ms. Purti Gupta , Ms. Henna George and Ms. Shivani Sharma , Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Kamal Kant Jha , Sr. Panel Counsel for GOI and Ms. Mitika Raja , A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill 2011. ii) In the year 2013, the name of the company was changed from M/s Anjani Infra Private Limited to M/s Balajee Developwell Private Limited vide fresh Certificate of incorporation dated 23.02.2013. In the year 2014, the company purchased five land plots worth around Rs. 6 crores (book value) in Noida adjacent to Delhi vide registered Sale Agreements. The company had also made an advance payment of approximately Rs. 1.90 crores towards the purchase of the said assets. Subsequent to acquisition of the said plots, the company started working towards their development but all efforts went in vain due to sluggish demand for the properties and lack of funds to build structures thereon (Annexure-A/4 Colly of the Appeal). iii) The C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entity earning income as commission agent, interest, getting its tax deducted, holding assets and having liabilities in the form of creditors which is evident from the copies of the AS 26 for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2019-20. The taxed business transactions and other activities reflected in the financial statements of the company clearly show that on the date of the notifications dated 27.04.2017 and 30.06.2017, the company was functional and operational. vi) Being aggrieved by the notice of the Respondent of Striking Off , the Appellant Company approached the Tribunal under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the name of the Company in the Register maintained by the Registrar of Companies (RoC), NCT of Delh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... developed the projects. Further also failed to appreciate the numerous Judgments of this Tribunal wherein if the company has substantial assets on record, then the name of the company cannot be struck off. Reference:- Khetan Granite private Limited V. Registrar of Companies, Company Appeal (AT) No. 290 of 2019, judgment dated 20.01.2020. Priya Fabricator V. Registrar of Companies, Company Appeal (AT) No. 264 of 2019, judgment dated 11.12.2019. Insuflex India Pvt. Ltd. V. Registrar of Companies, Company Appeal (AT) No. 203 of 2019, judgment dated 12.12.2019. 5. It is further submitted that Section 248(1) of the Act, specifically provides that statutory notice has to be issued to all the Directors of the company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he restoration of the name of the company in Registrar of Companies records and the Bank Account of the company becoming operational. The non-compliance is inadvertent, non-deliberate and unintentional and the Appellant has been/is ready to comply with all the statutory provisions in the further, if the name of the company is restored by the Registrar of Companies. In view of the above submissions, the impugned order is fit to be set aside and the instant Appeal may be allowed. 8. On the other hand, the Respondent/Registrar of Companies in his reply stated that as per available records on MCA 21 portal, the last Directors of the Appellant Company were found namely Jitender Kharbanda and Mukesh Kumar. The Company was incorporated on 13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her able to prove that it was carrying any business before it was struck off nor produced any just and equitable grounds for restoration before the Tribunal. In view of the above, the Appeal may be dismissed. 10. After hearing the parties and going through the pleadings made on behalf of the parties, we observed that the Audited Financial Statements for the Financial Years from 2014-15 to 2015-16 shows that the Appellant Company is having substantial movable as well as immovable assets and the Company was/is in operation when the name was struck off. 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
