Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(3) vs Registrar Of Companies 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, Best Chlorination Systems Pvt. Ltd., B-16B, Gangotri Enclave Alaknanda, New Delhi-110019, 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 5 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 2012-2013, was duly struck off from the Register of Companies.

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, M/s. Best Clorination Systems Private Limited was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 bearing CIN No. U74899DL1991PTC043743 and PAN AAACB0043P from the register of ROC. That during the application not at the time of passing of order the assessing officer was informed about any such proceedings before the ROC. It is submitted that the assessee is an unlisted company. The assessee has not filed return of income tax for the AY 2012-2013. Pertinent here is the fact that the Assessee is a company and is mandatorily required to filed its return of income under Section 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961. After collection of information from various sources the information is forwarded to Jurisdictional Assessing Officers for taking further necessary action n the cases in which the information is received. The said information in the cases where the assessee had not filed its return of Income is available is NMS module of the database maintained by the IT Department. A Letter was generated on 20.03.2017 and issued to the Assessee seeking his/its response with regard to the non-filing of return for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. However, no compliance has been made by the Assess in response to the said letter. It is submitted that as per NMS the following information was received with respect to the Assessee:-

S. No.

Particulars

Amount

1

AIR-003-Paid Rs. 2,00,000 or more for purchase of units of Mutual Fund

Rs. 96,50,000/-

It is submitted that from this information it is seen that during the AY 2012-2013 the Assesee had receipts. Further the abovementioned information suggested that the assessee was having taxable income amounting to at least Rs. 96,50,000/- during the AY 2012-2013. On the basis of the above information a notice U/s 148 of the Act was issued to the Assessee for initiation of reassessment proceedings in the case of the assessee. That in order to verify the veracity of the same, notices u.s. 133(6) was also issued to the assessee as well as the last known directors of the assessee from the MCA website. However, no compliance has been made by the Assessee or the directors in response to the said notices. It is submitted that as per the ITS details, the assessee has received an amount of at least Rs. 96,50,000/- from the transaction made by it.. Because an amount of Rs. 96,50,000/- has escaped assessment and is required to be assessed in the hands of the Assessed in the hands of the Assessee Company for which the name of the Assessee needs to be restored in the register of ROC. It is pertinent to mention here that the law does not permit any person to escape their tax liability by having their name removed from the Register of Companies.

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.

Notice dated 29.03.2019 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.