Income Tax Officer, Ward-25(4) vs Registrar Of Companies And Ors.

That the Income Tax Officer, Ward 25(4), New Delhi has filed this Appeal under Section 252(1) read with Section 252(3) of the Companies Act,

2013 on being aggrieved by the action of the Registrar of Companies (""RoC"") in striking off the name of M/s Trogon Buildwell Private Limited (""the

Company"") from the Register of Companies.

It is stated by the Appellant that ""the Company"" is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 on

15.03.2010 with CIN No. U70200DL2010PTC200155. The Authorised as well as Paid up Share capital of the Company is Rs.1,00,000/-. The

registered Office of the Company is at WZ-26A, Gali No. 14, A/5 Sadh Nagar, New Delhi-110046. Therefore, the jurisdiction lies with this Tribunal.

The Appellant in its Appeal has averred that:

5.2 Information was received from Deputy Director of Income Tax, (Investigation), Unit-4(2), Jhandelwalan Extension, New Delhi vide

communication dated 08.03.2018 that Respondent Company has current account No. 057xxxxxxxx79 with ICICI Bank, Palam Branch,

which was opened on 10.04.2010 and had cumulative credits of Rs. 90 lakhs and cumulative debits of Rs. 85 lakhs. It was also informed

that in F.Y. 2010-11, the account had transactions only from April 2010 to February 2011 with total credits including cash deposits

amounting to Rs. 95,84,900/-. The cash deposits appears to have been made from various cities including New Delhi, Dimapur, Kaputhala,

Alwar, Ludhiana, Tezpur, Rohtak, Sibsagar, Neemrana and Ahmedabad. It was also informed that as per the documents submitted to the

Bank, the Respondent Company has engaged in the business of construction of residential houses, commercial buildings etc.

5.3 Summons under Section 131(1A) of the I.T. Act was issued on 19.08.2014 to produce financials and source of the cash deposits in bank

account no 057,ocxxxxxx79. However, there was no compliance by the Respondent Company. It was further informed by the Investigation

Wing that another summons under Sec. 131(1A) of the I.T. Act was issued to the Principal Officer of the Respondent Company at A-80, 1st

Floor, Sector-7, Palam Extension, Dwarka, New Delhi-75 but the same was returned unserved with remark ""No Such Person"". Summons

issued to Shri Vikram Singh, Director of the Respondent Company was returned un-served with remarks ""refused to receive"".

5.4 It is seen the Respondent Company did not file its ITR for A. Y. 2011-12. As per the provisions of Section 139 of the I.T. Act, every

Company is mandatorily required to file its return of income within the prescribed time in the prescribed manner. Thus, the Company has

violated the provisions of the Income Tax by not filling the ITR

It is submitted by the Appellant that it had issued a notices dated 28.03.2018 for the Assessment Year 2011-12 to the Company under Section

148/147 of the IT Act for assessment, re-assessment, or recomputation of income escaping assessment of tax.

It is stated by the Appellant that during the Assessment Year proceedings for A.Y 2011-12, on perusal of the MCA website the Appellant came to

know that the Company has been struck off from the Register of Companies by RoC vide Si. No 20801 of Notice No. ROC-DEL-248(5) /STK-

7/2879) dated 30.06.2017.

The Appellant contends that in order to render the Assessment order valid in the eyes of law and to enable the IT Department to take appropriate

and effective steps for recovery of taxes and for any further consequential proceedings, there is a need for restoration of the Company, viz., M/ s

Trogon Buildwell Private Limited in the Register of Companies.

That the Appellant has filed its Affidavit of Service dated 01.04.2019 wherein it is stated that the service on the Respondent Company and its

Directors has been effected through publication on 29.03.2019 in the newspapers namely ""The Business Standard"" (English) and ""Jansatta"" (Hindi).

Considering the fact that the notice was served upon the Respondents through publication and no one was present on behalf of the respondents, they

were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 08.05.2019 of this Tribunal.

The Respondent No.1 i.e., ROC did not file reply despite opportunities. During the course of hearing on 03.02.2021, AROC submitted that ROC

has no objection to the revival of the Respondent Company.

It is observed that the Income Tax Department is an aggrieved party within the meaning of Section 252(1) read with 252(3) of the Companies Act,

2013 as it has to recover taxes payable by the Respondent Company and great prejudice will be caused to its revenues, if the name of the Company is

not restored back to the Register of the Companies.

Accordingly, in sequel to the above, we consider it to be just and equitable to allow restoration of the Company and allow the Appeal. The

Registrar of Companies, is directed to restore the name of the Company namely, M/s Trogon Buildwell Private Limited in its Register, as if the name

of the Company had not been struck off in accordance with Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013. ROC is also directed to take any other penal

action against other Respondents for default, if any, in accordance with the statutory/legal provisions.

The Appeal is allowed accordingly.

Let the copy of Order be supplied to the parties.