Income Tax Officer vs Registrar Of Companies And Ors.

This appeal is filed by Income Tax Department, through its Income Tax Officer, under Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 (for brevity

‘the Act’) against the order of striking off the name of the company M/s Abhi Sea Shore Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. (for brevity ‘the

Company’) passed by the respondent no.1 Registrar of Companies, under section 248(1) of the Act read with Rule 7 of Companies (Removal of

Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules, 2016 published on 30.06.2017 vide notification no. ROC-DEL/248(5)/STK-7/2879 by

Registrar of Companies, the respondent herein.

The company is incorporated as a Private Limited Company under the provision of Companies Act, 1956 with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of

Delhi and Haryana on 18.05.2009 having CIN No. U93030DL2009PTC190390.

The company is having its registered office at 307 Hemkunt Chamber, 89 Nehru Place, New Delhi- 110019.

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

As per the notice of non- compliance of provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 in respect to filing of annual returns and financial statements for the

financial year 31.03.2010 upto 31.03.2017, the name of the company was struck off 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.

Registrar of companies submits that they have no objections to the prayer of the applicant being granted by this bench. None appeared for

Respondent No.2 to Respondent No.4 and they were proceeded ex-parte.

The Appellant prays for the restoration of company namely M/s Abhi Sea Shore Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. in order to take forward proceedings

under section 148 initiated against the company. As per averments, on the basis of the Non-Filer Management System, information received by the

Income Tax department, the respondent company has made cash deposits of Rs. 2,22,000/- and Time Deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/- in its Bank Account

and received interest other than interest on securities (under Section 194A of the I.T. Act) amounting to Rs. 3,242/- during F.Y. 2010-11 relevant

A.Y. 2011-12 and further the respondent company has not filed its return of income for the assessment year 2011-12. The respondent company has

not disclosed the source of income and has not offered the said cash deposited for tax.

The appellant has further submitted that it appears that there is tax evasion which has escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 &

148 of the Income Tax Act and action in accordance with law is required to be initiated against the company. It is submitted that assessment of

income of the Respondent Company for the Assessment Year 2011-12 is pending and shall get barred by time on 31.12.2018. Notice dated

30.03.2018 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued to the respondent at its registered address and email id as well as through

affixation, to which there is no response, from any of the Respondents.

The appellant has further submitted that Reasons for issue of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were served on the respondent

at its registered address and also Form for recording the reasons for initiating the proceedings under section 148 and for obtaining the approval of the

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax is annexed with the appeal.

The Ld. Counsel for the Income Tax submits that in order to recover the taxes on the undisclosed income of the respondent company and to

charge and recover the revenue from the transactions from the respondent company during the year 2011-12, it necessitates restoration of the

Company in the Register of Companies to proceed further in accordance with law, since as on date the proceedings cannot continue against the

company, for it being struck off.

The income tax department is an aggrieved party within the meaning of section 252(1) as it has to recover taxes if any payable by the company

and great prejudice will be caused to revenue if the name of the respondent company is not restored back. In above circumstances, this appeal is

allowed. The Registrar of companies is therefore directed to restore the name of the Company in their Register and may proceed to take such other

and further penal action against the respondents in accordance with the statutory provisions. The name of the Appellant Company shall then, as a

consequence, stand restored to the Register of the Registrar of Companies, as if the name 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.