Safdarjung Vaults Private Limited And Ors vs Registrar Of Companies And Ors

Kapal Kumar Vohra, Member (T)

This Appeal has been filed by Safdarjung Vaults Private Limited (Appellant) invoking the provisions of Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 (The Act) for restoration of the name of the Appellant Company in the register maintained by the Registrar of Companies (RoC).

As per the averments, Safdarjung Vaults Private Ltd, Delhi was incorporated on 03.08.2006 as a private limited Company and has its registered office at A-2/40 Safdarjung Enclave New Delhi 110029 having Corporate Identity Number (CIN) U75302DL2006PTC151560. The business of the Appellant Company is to acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise lands and buildings in India or elsewhere and to erect and maintain safe custody, fire proof and/or burglar proof strong rooms, safes, vaults, warehouses, godowns and depositories and letting for hire safe deposit lockers for keeping in safe custody jewelleries, ornaments, moneys, securities, bullions, gold, silver, goods, merchandise and documents relating to title and property and other valuable articles and works of art and other articles and materials of all kinds whatsoever for the purpose of storage gratuitously or otherwise letting on hire.

An action was initiated by the RoC at the instance of MCA in striking off the names of several Companies who had failed to file their Statutory Returns. The Appellant had failed to file its Financial Statements and Annual Returns for the FY 2015-16 onwards thereby giving rise to the surmise that the Company was not doing any business activity. Consequently, its name was struck off by the Respondent (RoC) from the Register of Companies (Register) under Section 248 of the Act vide notification dated 08.08.2018. The Appellant Company admits its default in carrying out the statutory compliances but submits that the same was due to lack of professional guidance, inadvertence & oversight.

The Appellant is ready to submit its Financial Statements and Annual Returns before the Respondent.

The Appellant submits that it has been in continuous business operation, has been regular in preparing balance sheets and filing Income Tax Returns with the competent authorities. In order to corroborate this submission, the Appellant has placed before us the following evidence:

i. The Company has submitted Income Tax Returns for the AY 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19.

ii. Further as per the Audited Financial statements as on 31st March 2018, the Company had revenue from operations at Rs. 13,65,300. It has current assets and liabilities including Cash and Cash Equivalents. For the FY 2016-17 the Company had revenue from operations totaling Rs. 17,78,300.

iii. Copy of Bank Statements of Oriental Bank of Commerce for the period 01.01.2019 to 28.02.2019, showing credit balance in its account.

The provisions pertaining to restoration of the name of the Company have been provided in Section 252 of the Act which include that, if it is just and equitable to restore the name of the Company in the Register, the Tribunal may direct the RoC to restore the name in its Register.

The Appellant has been able to satisfy this Bench that is a going concern which necessitate and justify restoration of its name in the Register.

In view of the above, the Petition is allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs. 25,000 to the Prime Minister Relief Fund along with Rs. 50,000 to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. The restoration of the name of the Appellant Company in the Register will be subject to the Company's filing all outstanding documents for the defaulting years as required by law and completion of all formalities, including payment of any late fee or other charges which are leviable by the Respondent. The name of the Petitioner Company shall then stand restored in the Register of the RoC, as if its name had not been struck off.

The direction for freezing the Bank Account(s) of the Appellant Company, if on this ground, shall consequently be also set aside immediately to enable the Company to carry out its business operation. Compliance of this order for restoration shall be made by the Respondent with all its consequential effects within one week of compliance by the Appellant.

The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

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