AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Share Capital,Amount in INR
Authorised Capital,
10,00,000 Equity shared of Rs.10/- each","10,00,000
Total,"1,00,00,000
Issued, Subscribed and Paid-up Share Capital",
10,00,000 Equity Shares of Rs.10/- each","10,00,000
Total,"1,00,00,000
It is also Submitted by the Appellants that However, the status of the Company was marked as Dormant by the Registrar of Companies under",
Section 455(4) of the Companies Act,2013 by providing intimation through electronic mai1 on 12.01.2017 and no physical notice was received in this",
regard. The same has been annexed and marked as Annexure-7 therewith.,
The Respondent ROC in its report has stated that it has no objection if the name of the Company is restored in the Register of Companies. The,
Company be directed to prove that it was carrying on business or was in operation during the striking off and the company be also directed to file,
financial statements Up to date.,
The report of the Income Tax Department has been filed on 16.03.2018 and upon perusal of the same it has been observed that no adverse,
observation is recorded. And further perusal of the same shows that there is no Outstanding to be paid.,
It is seen from the records placed by the Appellants that the Company has been functioning during the period when the name of the company was,
struck off on 07.06.2017. However, it will not absolve the Appellants from filing the necessary statutory returns and documents and adhere to the",
provisions of Companies Act, 2013. In the instant case the Appellant has demonstrated mitigating circumstances for restoration that it was in operation",
on the date it was struck off.,
As per Sub section 3 of Section 252 contemplates that one of the three conditions are required to be satisfied before exercising jurisdiction to,
restore company to its original name on the register of the Roc namely:,
i. That the company at the time of its name was struck off was carrying on business.,
ii. Or it was in operation,
iii. Or it is otherwise just that the name of the company be restored on the register.,
Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, it can be seen from the overwhelming evidence/documents adduced by the",
Appellant that it was carrying on the business at the time its name was struck off from the register of companies.,
As a sequel to the aforesaid discussion it is seen from the documents available on record that the company was carrying on its business and was,
operative at the time of its name struck off from the register. The assumption of Registrar of Companies that the company was not in operation was,
clearly erroneous. Besides it is seen that the appeal has been filed within the stipulated period prescribed under Section 252 of the Act. Needless to,
say that ROC and Income Tax Department has raised no specific objection against the restoration of the Company subject to filing of financial,
statements up to date. Nobody would be prejudiced by the restoration of the company. On the contrary the restoration is clearly in the interest of the,
company. Since the company is a running company and the application has been filed on time, the Tribunal clearly has the power to restore the name",
of the Company. In this factual background and in the interest of justice the appeal filed by the Appellants deserves to be allowed.,
Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The Public Notice dated 30.06.2017 in so far as the name of the Company is hereby declared illegal and set",
aside. The restoration of the company's name to the Register will however be subject to its filing of all outstanding documents with proper filing fees,
along with additional fees required by law and completion of all formalities, including payment of any late fee or any other charges which are leviable",
on the respondent for the late filing of statutory returns and also on the payment of cost of Rs.25, 000/- to be paid to the Prime Minister Relief Fund",
(PMRF). 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(5) of the Companies Act, 2013.",
The appea1 is disposed of accordingly.,
Let the copy of the order be served to the parties.,