Company name restoration granted based on future prospects, with strict compliance terms for revival

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for restoration of the company's name, emphasizing the potential for business revival and revenue generation. The decision focused on future prospects rather than past activities, requiring substantial evidence for revival. Restoration was granted subject to strict terms, including filing pending returns, depositing funds, refraining from asset alienation, complying with director disqualification provisions, and submitting an affidavit of compliance within two months.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to striking off the name of the company under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013.
2. Compliance with statutory requirements by the company.
3. Financial position and operations of the company.
4. Scope for revival of the company's business.
5. Terms and conditions for restoration of the company's name.

Issue 1: Challenge to striking off the name of the company under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013:
The appeal was filed by shareholders aggrieved by the striking off of the company's name. The shareholders invoked Section 252(3) of the Act, claiming the company was a going concern. The respondent ROC stated that due process was followed but had no objection to restoration, subject to compliance with balance sheet and annual return filing requirements.

Issue 2: Compliance with statutory requirements by the company:
The company had been regular in convening meetings and filing income tax returns. However, the ROC highlighted non-compliance with certain provisions leading to the striking off. The Income Tax department's observation was limited to recent years, indicating no statutory dues assessed.

Issue 3: Financial position and operations of the company:
Financial statements revealed minimal revenue from operations, with no significant improvements over the years. Additional agreements and financial statements were submitted during the proceedings, showing some revenue generation post-striking off.

Issue 4: Scope for revival of the company's business:
The agreement between the company and a society demonstrated potential for revenue generation, supporting the argument for restoration. The Tribunal emphasized the need to consider future prospects and revenue generation potential, not solely past activities, for restoration under Section 252(3).

Issue 5: Terms and conditions for restoration of the company's name:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal, subject to conditions. The company was required to file pending returns, deposit funds for expenses, refrain from alienating assets, and comply with director disqualification provisions. An affidavit of compliance was mandated within two months.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for restoration of the company's name, emphasizing the potential for business revival and revenue generation. The decision was based on considerations of future prospects rather than just past activities, highlighting the importance of demonstrating substantial evidence for revival. The restoration was subject to strict terms and conditions to ensure compliance with statutory requirements and safeguard company assets.

---