Company status restored from strike off to Active under Companies Act, 2013 - Tribunal balances compliance and business needs

The Tribunal ordered the restoration of a company's status from strike off to Active under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Despite non-compliance with filing requirements leading to the strike off, the Tribunal considered the petitioner's unintentional lapse, absence of opposition, and undertakings to fulfill obligations. Balancing legal provisions with business interests, the Tribunal directed the restoration with conditions including filing documents, cost payment, and prompt business resumption. The decision aimed to facilitate business operations while ensuring compliance within set timelines.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Restoration of company status from strike off to Active under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.
2. Non-filing of audited financial statements and annual returns leading to strike off.
3. Compliance with statutory requirements and restoration conditions.
4. Exercise of powers by the Tribunal for ease of doing business.

Issue 1: Restoration of Company Status:
The case involved a petition filed under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking to restore the status of a company from strike off to Active. The petitioner, a financial consultancy firm, had its name struck off due to non-filing of financial statements and annual returns for two consecutive years. The petitioner contended that the lapse was unintentional and sought restoration to resume business activities.

Issue 2: Non-filing of Financial Statements:
The Registrar of Companies initiated action under Section 248(1) against the company for not filing balance sheets or annual returns from 2011-12 to 2018-19. The company failed to respond to notices, leading to its name being struck off. The petitioner argued that the non-compliance was inadvertent and provided assurances to rectify the filings upon restoration.

Issue 3: Compliance and Restoration Conditions:
The Tribunal considered the provisions of Section 248(6) which require the Registrar to ensure adequate provision for liabilities before striking off a company. Despite the legal basis for the strike off, the Tribunal leaned towards restoring the company's name, given the absence of investigations, lack of opposition from the respondent, and undertakings by directors/shareholders to fulfill pending obligations within the prescribed time.

Issue 4: Exercise of Tribunal's Powers:
In exercising its powers under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, the Tribunal balanced the legal requirements with the interest of justice and ease of doing business. The Tribunal directed the restoration of the company's name with specific conditions, including filing statutory documents, payment of costs, and resumption of business operations promptly post-restoration.

By considering the bona fide contentions of the petitioner and the principles of ease of doing business, the Tribunal ordered the restoration of the company's name, subject to compliance with specified conditions and requirements within the stipulated timelines.

---