Tribunal dismisses Application for company name restoration under Companies Act, 2013

The Tribunal dismissed the Application under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the company's name that was struck off by the Respondent under Section 248. The decision was based on the lack of ongoing business activities by the Applicant Company before being struck off, failure to file balance sheets since incorporation, and insufficient evidence or reasons to support restoration. The Tribunal found no justification for restoration and hence dismissed the Application without costs.

---

---

Issues:
Application under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of company name struck off by Respondent under Section 248.

Analysis:
1. The Applicant Company filed an Application under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, seeking restoration of its name after being struck off by the Respondent under Section 248. The Applicant Company was incorporated in 1978 with objectives related to cotton, wool, jute, etc. The Respondent issued notices for striking off in 2018, leading to the company's name being removed from the Register of Companies.

2. The Applicant Company, through its counsel, argued that challenges such as manpower shortage and electricity discontinuity hindered business operations. They cited lack of professional guidance for non-filing of annual returns and administrative lapses. The company also highlighted pending cases before various forums and sought restoration under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.

3. The Respondent, ROC Coimbatore, reported default in statutory filings since 2015, leading to the issuance of notices under Section 248(1) in 2018. After due procedure, the company was struck off and the action was published in the Gazette of India. The Applicant submitted documents like bank statements, annual returns, and income tax acknowledgments to support their plea for restoration.

4. The Tribunal noted that the Applicant Company ceased business activities before being struck off and failed to file balance sheets since incorporation. Despite active income tax filings, statutory returns were neglected. Details of tax payments from 2013-14 onwards were provided, showing no income or tax paid. The Tribunal found no evidence to justify restoration, leading to the dismissal of the Application without costs.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on the lack of business operations by the Applicant Company at the time of striking off and the absence of substantial reasons or evidence supporting the restoration of the company's name in the Register maintained by the Respondent. The dismissal of the Application was made in light of these findings.

---