Navkar Export Agencies Pvt. Ltd. And Anr. vs Registrar Of Companies

The present appeal is filed by Ms. Navkar Export Agencies Private Limited (for brevity the 'Company') through and by its director, under Section

252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 (for brevity the Act') against the order of striking off the name of the company, passed by the Respondent under

Section 248 (1) of the Act, issued vide bearing No. ROC/DELHI/248(5)/STK-7/4865 dated on 08.08.2018 by Registrar of Companies, the respondent

herein.

The Appellant states that, the company was incorporated as a Private Limited Company with the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and

Haryana under the Companies Act, 1956 on 13.07.1979 with CIN U74899 DL1979 PTC009740, having its registered office situated at 2527/VIII,

Bazar, Sita Ramfacing, IInd Floor, Facing Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi- 110006, within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

The Authorized Share Capital of the company is Rs. 1,00,000/- divided into 10,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. The issued, subscribed and paid

up share capital of the Company is Rs. 1,00,000/- divided into 10,000/- equity shares of Rs. 10/- each, as per the Master Data An hexed.

The main objects of the company are:

(a) To carry on in India or elsewhere business as traders, Commission Agents, Distributors, Stockiest, brokers guaranteed brokers, business

agents, Contractors, importers and exporters of any item.

(b) And other main objects.

The Respondent herein had issued Public notice bearing No. ROC/DELHI/248/STK-5/2018/2912 dated 18.06.2018. Consequently, Appellant's

name was struck off vide notice bearing No. ROC/DELHI/248(5)/STK-7/4865 dated on 08.08.2018 (Company's name appearing at Sl. No. 13676)

whereby name of 24280 companies have been struck off w.e.f. 08.08.2018 from the Registrar of Companies.

As per the ROC, Appellant had not filed its Financial Years and Annual Returns for the Financial Years ended on 31.03.2016 to 31.03.2020,

thereby giving rise to the surmise that the business of the company was not in operation. Consequently, the name of the company was struck off in

terms of provisions of Section 248 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.

The Appellant has brought forward the following documents about it being in operation and functional during the period of striking off:

i. The copies of Audited Financial Statements of the company for the period from F. Y. 2015-16 to 2019-20. The Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2018

reflects Current Assets in form of Cash and Cash Equivalents of Rs. 1,63,746/- Expenses in form of Other Expenses of Rs. 69,751/- and Revenue

from Operations of Rs. 15,000/-. The Revenue from Operations of Rs. 1,20,000/- as on 31.03.2017 is also reflected.

ii. The copy of Bank Statements of the Company in Canara Bank for the period 01.04.2015 to 27.03.2019 showing various transaction details of the

company and reflecting closing credit balance of Rs. 48,055.04 as on 30.06.2018.

iii. Copies of Income Tax Returns for the Assessment Years 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20. The tax paid by the company for A.Y. 2017-18 is Rs. 4,455/-

.

iv. Copies of Electricity Bill issued by BSES amuna Power limited of 2017-18.

v. Copies of Telephone Bill Foil issued by Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited dated 08.07.2016 and 08.02.2017.

ROC has filed its reply and stating that they have no objection if the name of company is restored in the Register of Companies, subject to appellant

filing all its pending statutory documents with the Registrar of Companies till date along with the requisite late filing fee as prescribed under the

Companies Act, 2013.

The Income Tax Department has not filed any reply.

The grounds contemplated under section 252 of Companies Act, 2013, are that the company was carrying on business or was in operation at the

time of striking off its name or where it appears ""just"" to the Adjudicating Authority that the name of the company is to be restored to the Register of

Companies and the Section 252(1) further contemplates that one of the above three conditions are required to be satisfied before exercising

jurisdiction to restore the company to its original name on the register of the Registrar of Companies.

The Appellant has submitted sufficient evidence that it has been in operation during the period preceding strike off, therefore it could not be termed

as a defunct company as per section 252 of the Act. Thus, taking into consideration the provisions of Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013,

which vests this Tribunal with a discretion where the Company, whose name has been struck off, and such Company is able to demonstrate that it is

just to do so, can restore the name of the Company, in the Register and in the interest of all stakeholders, including the Appellant itself, who seeks

restoration of the name of the Company in the register maintained by Registrar of Companies, the company deserve to be restored.

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The Public Notice of Registrar of Companies, striking off the name of the company, is hereby declared illegal

and set aside. The restoration of the company's name to the Register of Registrar of Companies is ordered subject to its filing of all outstanding

documents with proper filing fees along with additional fees required under law and completion of all formalities, including payment of any late fee or

any other charges which are leviable by the respondent for the late filing of statutory returns, and also subject to payment of Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to

Prime Minister's Relief Fund. 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 stands allowed and disposed of in the above terms.

Let the copy of the order be served to the parties.