Income-Tax Officer vs Registrar Of Companies And Ors.

This Appeal has been filed by Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(3), New Delhi invoking the provisions of Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 for

restoration of the name of the Respondents Company M/s. Triveni Electrofabs Private Limited„ A-30, (Back Lane) Mohan Garden, West Delhi,

New Delhi 110059 in the register maintained by the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi & Haryana..

As per the averments, M/s. Triveni Electrofabs Private Limited was incorporated on 05.06.2017 as a private limited company and has its registered

office at A-30, (Back Lane) Mohan Garden,West, Delhi, New Delhi- 110059, having CIN No.U31900DL2007PTC164413. The Authorized share

capital of the Company is Rs.5,00,000/- and paid up share capital of the Company is Rs.1,00,000/-.

That directors of the Respondent No.2- company, being Brijeshwar Kurl and Brij Kurl have been arrayed as Respondent No.3 and Respondent

no.4 respectively.

It is submitted by the appellants that from the information available with the Revenue through NMS/ITD software, information from AIR/ CIB

statements and Individual transaction statements (ITS) and 26 AS, it is observed that during the financial year 2011-2012 relevant to A.Y. 2012-2013,

the respondent -company had received contractual receipts amounting to Rs.54,20,134/-. The respondent -company did not file its income-tax return

for the A.Y. 2012-13 inspite of having received the said contractual receipts. In their Bank Punjab National Bank, Dwarka Branch, Delhi. As the

respondent-company did not disclose all material facts necessary for assessment, the Appellant has reason to believe that an estimated amount of

atleast Rs.52,20,134/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147(148 of the Income-tax Act and has not been brought under, the tax

for the AN. 2012-13. Therefore, appellant issued Notice dated 28.01.2019 U/s.148 of the Income-tax Act for the A.Y. 2012-13 for initiating

assessment proceedings in the company's case to assess the income not disclosed by the company. Notices dated 11.6.2019 and 05.09.2019 were also

issued by the Appellant but none attended the office of the Appellant- Income-tax to furnish the details/ reply to the notice. The appellant then passed

and issued Assessment Order U/Sec.144/ 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which resulted into creation of demand of Rs.9,73,294/- and Notices dated

13.12.2019 U/ Sec.274. r/w Sec.271(1)(c) of the Income-tax and Notice u/sec.274 r/w/. Sec.271(F) imposing penalty were issued to the respondent-

company. The said assessment proceedings are pending. The appellant while perusing MCA website found that the name of the respondent-company

has been struck off from the Register of Companies by the RoC on 30.06.2017 at Sr.No.20790.

On perusal of the MCA website, the appellant has come to know that the name of the respondent company was struck off vide Notification -

No.ROC \-DEL/248(5)/STK-7/2879 dated 30..06 2017 in terms of provision of Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 7 and Rule

9 of the Companies (Removal of Names. of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules; 2016 by the ROC.

It is submitted by the appellant that the name of the respondent company had been struck off by the ROC without enquiry and the same was riot

intimated to the Appellant, Assessing Officer Income-tax or the concerned Commissioner of Income Tax. The same could not be allowed to be

invoked resulting in escapement of tax liability or any other liability on the company which seeks to get its name removed from the register of the Ld.

ROC

The appellant submitted that the Income Tax department being aggrieved under the Section 252 of the companies Act 2013 by the removal of the

name of the company from the register by the registrar of the company as for the reopening of assessment proceedings the company has to be in

existence for framing Assessment Order for recovering the taxes due and for any further consequential proceedings against the respondent-company.

It is further submitted that since the respondent company has become non-existent entity, the respondent company and its directors are trying to

escape the assessment proceedings and the liability that will arise out of the said proceedings.

The appellant has further submitted that in order to initiate proceedings for assessment of income against the respondent -company for F.Y. 2011-

12 relevant to Assessment Year 2012-13 which are pending as per Section 144/ 147, Sec.274 read with Sec.271(1)(c ), Sec.274 r/w section 271F of

the Income tax Act, 1961. To render assessment order valid in the eyes of Law and to enable the Appellant to take steps for recovery of taxes and

for any further consequential proceedings, the respondent- company's name be restored to the Register of Companies as if the name of the company

was never struck off.

Denial to restore the name of the respondent company in the Register of the ROC will not only condone the wrong doing of the respondent

company but it will also encourage of escapement of tax liabilities by such subterfuge which will be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue in the long

run. The service of notice to respondents has been made through publication in newspaper, .but none appeared.

The respondent-company failed to appear before the Court to provide its defence. Hence, the Order was reserved on 15.12.2020. Upon perusal of

the -documents and submissions made, this appeal is allowed. The Registrar of companies is directed to restore the name of the Respondent Company

in their Register and also proceed to take such other and further penal action against the respondent in accordance with the statutory provisions. The

name of the respondent Company shall .then,. as . a consequence, stand restored to the Register of the Registrar Of Companies, as if the nanie of the

company had not been struck off in accordance with Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Let the copy of the order be served to the parties.