Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(1) vs Registrar Of Companies And Ors.

Under Consideration is an Appeal filed by Income Tax Department (hereinafter referred as ""Appellant"") invoking the provisions of Section 252 (1)

R/w Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the name of the Respondent No. 2 viz., Takshati Consulting Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter

referred as ""Respondent No.2"") in the Register of Companies maintained by the Registrar of Companies (hereinafter referred as ""RoC""), herein the

Respondent No.l.

Service appears to be duly affected on the Respondent No. 2 and its Directors, but none have appeared.

Vide Proceedings initiated by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, through the office of the RoC, several names of companies were struck off for

want of statutory filings. The name of the Respondent No.2 was also struck off from the Register of Companies for non-filing of any Returns or

Financial Statements.

The provisions of section 252 (1) R/w Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013 have been invoiced by the Appellant to see restoration off the

name of the Respondent No.2 in order to carry out proceedings initiated against the Respondent No.2. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for the

Appellant that there was outstanding tax due to the tune of Rs. 3,08,620/- pertaining to the A.Y. 2010-11, and re-assessment proceedings against the

Respondent No.2 for the A.Y. 2013-13 was initiated by issuance of Notice dated 27.03.2019 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The

Assessment Order dated 20.11.2019 was passed which has resulted into raising of Tax Demand of Rs. 6,65,243/- which is outstanding. Further, as per

information available with the revenue it is observed that during the F.Y. 2011-12 relevant A.Y. 2012-13, the Respondent No. 2 has received fee for

professional/Technical services, amounting to Rs. Rs 15,42,842 from different parties on which TDS has been deducted under Section 194J of Income

Tax Act 1961.

Therefore, the Appellant has reason to believe that at least an amount of Rs. 15,48,842/- has escaped assessment during A.Y. 2012-13 because the

Respondents did not disclose fully and truly all material facts to enable assessment, nor filed its Income Tax Return.

In the meanwhile, the name of the Respondent No. 2 has been ""Struck Off"" by the RoC vide STK-7 dated 30.06.2017.

The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that the aforesaid facts necessitate restoration of the name of the Respondent No. 2 in the Register of

Companies to proceed further in accordance with law. In view of the grounds raised by the Appellant, being an aggrieved person, the prayer can be

entertained u/s 252(1) R/w Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Considering the facts and circumstances the petition is allowed. The RoC is directed to restore the name of the Respondent No. 2 in the Register of

companies and also proceed to take such other and further penal action against the respondents in accordance with the statutory provisions.

We, however, make it clear that this Bench has only directed restoration of the name of the Respondent No.2 in the Register of Companies

maintained by the RoC on the basis of averments made in the petition and have in no way endorsed or adjudicated about the Appellant's entitlement to

recover any tax etc. which shall be adjudicated by the concerned Department subject to the law of limitation governing such recoveries. Charges

involved in seeking restoration of the company's name with the office of the ROC shall be borne by the Appellant.

The petition is disposed of in terms of the above. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant shall obtain a certified copy of this Order to submit before the

concerned ROC for compliance.