Company Name Restoration Granted after Compliance Review

The Tribunal granted the Company Petition for restoration of the company's name in the Register of Companies. The Petitioner's company was struck off due to non-compliance with filing requirements and lack of business activity. Despite initial defaults, the Petitioner rectified the situation by submitting financial statements and tax returns. The Bench assessed the company's financial status and operations, determining it was just and equitable to restore the company's name. The Registrar was directed to restore the name upon payment of costs and filing pending documents within a specified timeframe, with instructions to unfreeze the company's accounts for operational continuity.

---

---

Issues:
1. Restoration of company name in the Register of Companies.
2. Non-compliance leading to striking off the company's name.
3. Lack of notice and opportunity to be heard before striking off.
4. Financial statements and annual returns non-filing.
5. Company's operations and financial status evaluation.
6. Relief sought by the petitioner for restoration.

Analysis:
1. The Company Petition sought restoration of the company's name in the Register of Companies under section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.
2. The Petitioner company was struck off by the Respondent Registrar of Companies due to defaults in statutory compliances, specifically failure to file Financial Statements and Annual Returns for 2015-16 and 2016-17, and not carrying on any business for two preceding years.
3. The Petitioner alleged lack of notice in Form STK-5 and absence of Public Notice and reasonable opportunity of being heard before the striking off action was initiated.
4. The Petitioner admitted inadvertent non-filing of financial statements and provided Audited Accounts for the years 2015-16 to 2018-19, along with Income-Tax Returns acknowledgments for the relevant years.
5. The Bench evaluated the financial statements of the company, noting revenue, expenses, assets, and borrowings for the financial years 2015-16 and 2016-17, concluding that the company had operations and financial standing.
6. Considering the submissions, documents, and observations, the Bench found it just and equitable to allow the restoration prayer sought by the Petitioner company.
7. The Tribunal directed the Respondent Registrar to restore the company's name upon payment of specified costs and filing pending financial statements and Annual Returns within a stipulated period post-restoration, failing which the order would stand vacated.
8. Post-restoration, the Registrar was instructed to communicate with bank authorities for defreezing the company's accounts, ensuring operational continuity.

This detailed analysis encapsulates the issues raised, the arguments presented, the evaluation conducted, and the relief granted in the Tribunal's judgment regarding the restoration of the company's name in the Register of Companies.

---