Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The HC held that the Registrar of Companies (ROC) failed to follow proper procedure under the second proviso to Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013 for reviving a struck-off company. The provision requires the ROC to file an application before the NCLT within three years from the dissolution order if a company was struck off inadvertently or based on incorrect information. In this case, the ROC neither filed such application nor acted within the three-year period from the January 11, 2016 dissolution order. Consequently, the revival of the company was deemed improper, and the court directed the ROC to strike off the company's name from the Register of Companies and take all necessary legal steps. Petition allowed.
The HC held that the Registrar of Companies (ROC) failed to follow proper procedure under the second proviso to Section 252 of Companies Act, 2013 for reviving a struck-off company. The provision requires the ROC to file an application before the NCLT within three years from the dissolution order if a company was struck off inadvertently or based on incorrect information. In this case, the ROC neither filed such application nor acted within the three-year period from the January 11, 2016 dissolution order. Consequently, the revival of the company was deemed improper, and the court directed the ROC to strike off the company's name from the Register of Companies and take all necessary legal steps. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
