TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Registrar of Companies could insist that foreign subscribers furnish a local address as a pre-condition for incorporation of a private limited company.
Analysis: The petitioners had complied with the requirements for incorporation and had submitted the necessary forms and supporting documents. The Court found that neither the Companies Regulations, 1956 nor the provisions relied upon by the respondent required foreign subscribers to state a local address as a condition precedent. Regulation 17 and the relevant provisions concerning incorporation and filing of forms only authorised the authorities to seek rectification of defects or completion of incomplete information. The material relied upon by the respondent also did not support the insistence on a local address. The Court further noted that a similar company with the same foreign subscribers had already been registered in Maharashtra without such a requirement, and the respondent offered no satisfactory explanation for the differential treatment. The petitioners also undertook to appoint local officers at the registered office in Goa to receive communications and to remain liable under the Companies Act, 1956.
Conclusion: The insistence on furnishing a local address was held to be unsupported by the applicable law and unjustified; the direction to register and incorporate the company without that condition was granted in favour of the petitioners.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
