<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (3) TMI 514 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405186</link>
    <description>A struck-off company will not be restored unless it shows that it was carrying on business or operations, or that the statutory basis for strike-off is otherwise unsustainable. Here, the company had admitted defaults in filing financial statements and annual returns for multiple years, received strike-off notices, and failed to submit effective objection or convincing proof of existing or prospective business. The audited accounts reflected only nominal balances and no meaningful turnover or activity. On those facts, the NCLT found no infirmity in the Registrar&#039;s action and held that restoration was not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2021 08:40:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=638811" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 514 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405186</link>
      <description>A struck-off company will not be restored unless it shows that it was carrying on business or operations, or that the statutory basis for strike-off is otherwise unsustainable. Here, the company had admitted defaults in filing financial statements and annual returns for multiple years, received strike-off notices, and failed to submit effective objection or convincing proof of existing or prospective business. The audited accounts reflected only nominal balances and no meaningful turnover or activity. On those facts, the NCLT found no infirmity in the Registrar&#039;s action and held that restoration was not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405186</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>