Company name restoration under strike-off law allowed subject to compliance with filing obligations and statutory conditions.
A deregistered company's name was restored under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 because the application, filed by a shareholder/director, was within the statutory time limit and the Tribunal found restoration just and equitable. The relief was made conditional on filing all pending statutory documents, annual accounts, annual returns and income-tax returns, together with payment of prescribed fees, additional fees and costs, delivery of the order to the Registrar, and publication of the restoration in the Official Gazette. The restoration was limited to the strike-off action and did not prevent future lawful action for other violations.
Issues: (i) whether the appeal for restoration of the company's name was maintainable and within limitation; (ii) whether the struck off company's name should be restored in the register of companies, and on what terms.
Issue (i): whether the appeal for restoration of the company's name was maintainable and within limitation.
Analysis: The application was filed by a shareholder/director of the deregistered company under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The record showed that the company had been struck off only in 2019 and the appeal was filed in 2021, bringing it within the statutory time frame. The applicant was treated as eligible to seek restoration.
Conclusion: The appeal was held to be maintainable and within limitation.
Issue (ii): whether the struck off company's name should be restored in the register of companies, and on what terms.
Analysis: The Tribunal found that restoration was just and equitable in view of the company's plea that it had been carrying on business, along with the undertaking to file all pending statutory documents, annual accounts, annual returns and income-tax returns. At the same time, the restoration was made conditional upon compliance with filing obligations, payment of prescribed fees and additional fees, payment of cost, delivery of a certified copy of the order to the Registrar, and publication of the restoration order in the Official Gazette. The direction was confined to the strike-off action and did not bar future lawful action for other violations.
Conclusion: The company's name was directed to be restored, but only subject to the stated conditions.
Final Conclusion: The petition was allowed in part, with restoration of the company's name ordered upon compliance with specified statutory and monetary conditions.
Ratio Decidendi: A company struck off under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 may be restored under Section 252(3) where the appeal is timely and restoration is found just and equitable, but such relief can be made conditional on full post-restoration compliance with statutory filing and related obligations.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
