https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403429 The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Cuttack Bench dismissed the appeal under CP (Appeal) No. 134/CTB/2020, upholding the decision to strike off the company's name under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. The tribunal found that the company failed to demonstrate active business operations during the default period, leading to the rejection of the application under Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The lack of financial transactions and employment details supported the Registrar of Companies' decision to strike off the company's name. en-us Mon, 28 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Nov 2021 18:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403429 The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Cuttack Bench dismissed the appeal under CP (Appeal) No. 134/CTB/2020, upholding the decision to strike off the company's name under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013. The tribunal found that the company failed to demonstrate active business operations during the default period, leading to the rejection of the application under Section 252 (3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The lack of financial transactions and employment details supported the Registrar of Companies' decision to strike off the company's name. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 28 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403429