https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394901 The court upheld the Registrar of Companies' decision to strike off the petitioner company's name under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. Despite the petitioner's arguments regarding non-compliance with Section 248 (5) and 248 (6), the court found the Registrar's actions lawful due to the lack of necessary undertakings. The court also ruled out the applicability of Section 455 on dormant companies, as the petitioner had not applied for such status. The dismissal of the writ petition emphasized the importance of statutory compliance and meeting obligations to prevent company strike-offs. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:54:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394901 The court upheld the Registrar of Companies' decision to strike off the petitioner company's name under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. Despite the petitioner's arguments regarding non-compliance with Section 248 (5) and 248 (6), the court found the Registrar's actions lawful due to the lack of necessary undertakings. The court also ruled out the applicability of Section 455 on dormant companies, as the petitioner had not applied for such status. The dismissal of the writ petition emphasized the importance of statutory compliance and meeting obligations to prevent company strike-offs. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394901