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

Sumita Purkayastha, Member (T)

This petition has been filed by Income Tax Authority invoking the provisions of Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the name of the Respondent No. 2 company, Tushar (India) Pvt. Ltd., 1837/138 Tri Nagar, Shanti Nagar, Delhi-110035, in the Register of Companies maintained by the RoC, respondent No. 1.

Service was duly effected on the respondent company and its Directors. Other than the RoC, none appeared on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 to 4 to oppose the prayer made by the petitioner. Respondent No. l the RoC specifically submits that they have no objections to the prayer of the petitioner being granted by this bench.

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

Respondent No. 2 company, which had not filed any Return or Financial Statement after the Assessment year 2011-2012, was duly struck off from the Register of Companies vide Notice No. ROC/DELHI/248(5)/STK-7/4865 dated 08.08.2018.

Invoking the provision of section 252 of the Act, the Income Tax Dept. prayed for its restoration in order to carry out proceedings initiated against them. As per averments, the information available with the Income Tax Department system states that during the Financial Year 2011-2012 relevant to the A.Y. 2012-2013 the respondent No. 2 company had undertaken peeny stock transaction in Scrip No. IND INFO&SOF to the extent of Rs. 1,26,398/- during the financial year 2011-2012 relevant to the A.T. 2012-2013. On analysis of the information received from the Investigation Wing, it was found that the respondent company had used an inactive PAN No. AABCT5850B for undertaking the above transaction, while the actual PAN No. of the respondent company is AABCT5018K, using which the respondent company filed its income tax returns since AY 2007-2008. Notice under Section 133(6) of the IT Act sent the respondent company did not elicit any response. As the respondent company did not disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment, the appellant has reason to believe that an estimated amount of at least Rs. 1,26,398/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147/148 of the IT Act and has not been brought under tax for the AY 2012-2013.

The respondent No. 2 company did not disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment thus escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Ld. Standing Counsel for the IT dept. submits that there are recovery & penalty proceedings pending under Section 133(6) of Income Tax Act. Action in accordance with law is required to be initiated against the company. Notice dated 29.03.2018 under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961, was issued to the respondent at its registered address/email id as well as vide affixation to which there has been no response.

Ld. Counsel for the Income Tax Submits that the aforesaid facts necessitate restoration of the name of the Respondent Company in the Register of Companies to proceed further in accordance with law. In view of the grounds raised by the applicant, being an aggrieved person, the prayer can be entertained u/s 252(3) of the Code.

The petition is, therefore, allowed. The RoC is therefore 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 respondents in accordance with the statutory provisions.

We however make it clear that this Bench has only directed restoration of the name of the appellant company in the Register of Companies maintained by the ROC on the basis of averments made in the petition and in no way endorse or have adjudicated about their entitlement to recover which shall be adjudicated by the department subject to the laws 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 applicant. Petition is disposed off in terms of the above. Compliance be made with the RoC within 30 days.