Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Directors must file for voluntary striking off to avoid contempt of court. Compliance with Companies Act sec. 248(2) crucial. The court directed the petitioners, who challenged a list of disqualified directors, to file necessary documents for voluntary striking off and apply ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Directors must file for voluntary striking off to avoid contempt of court. Compliance with Companies Act sec. 248(2) crucial.
The court directed the petitioners, who challenged a list of disqualified directors, to file necessary documents for voluntary striking off and apply under the Condonation of Delay Scheme -2018. Compliance with Section 248(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 would grant benefits under CODS-2018, leading to the company's removal. The impugned list of disqualified directors was stayed pending further decision. Failure to comply or provide accurate information could result in contempt proceedings. The petition and pending applications were disposed of, emphasizing compliance with dissolution requirements and CODS-2018 to avoid contempt of court prosecution.
Issues: Impugning a "lists of disqualified directors" published by respondents. Petitioners' disqualification under Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013. Inability to avail Condonation of Delay Scheme -2018 (CODS - 2018) due to company's strike off. Inability to seek revival under Section 252 of the Act. Desire to voluntarily seek dissolution under Section 248(2) of the Act.
Analysis: The petitioners challenged a list of disqualified directors published by the respondents, claiming to be directors of a company that had not conducted business or filed returns as per the Companies Act, 2013. Due to non-operation and strike off of the company, they were unable to benefit from the Condonation of Delay Scheme -2018 (CODS - 2018) and revival under Section 252 of the Act. The petitioners expressed willingness to voluntarily dissolve the company under Section 248(2) of the Act.
The court acknowledged the company's inactivity and directed the petitioners to file requisite returns, necessary resolutions for voluntary striking off, and an application under CODS - 2018 in hardcopies to the Registrar of Companies. If compliant with Section 248(2) of the Act, the petitioners would be granted benefits under CODS - 2018, with the company's removal deemed as striking off. The impugned list of disqualified directors was stayed until 31.03.2018 or the respondents' final decision.
The order, made with assistance of the learned ASG, highlighted that failure to comply with CODS-2018 or dissolution requirements could lead to contempt of court prosecution. Emphasizing the importance of the petitioners' statements, the court warned of contempt proceedings if found incorrect. The petition and pending applications were disposed of, concluding the judgment.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
