<?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 (12) TMI 1277 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , GUWAHATI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416511</link>
    <description>A struck-off company&#039;s name may be restored to the register where the Tribunal is satisfied that restoration is just and equitable under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal considered the company&#039;s non-filing of statutory returns, the strike-off process, limitation, and the explanation that the defaults were not intentional, together with the statutory requirements for notice, publication, and restoration. On the material placed, revival was found appropriate, subject to compliance with pending statutory filings and payment of costs, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2021 08:52:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 1277 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , GUWAHATI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416511</link>
      <description>A struck-off company&#039;s name may be restored to the register where the Tribunal is satisfied that restoration is just and equitable under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal considered the company&#039;s non-filing of statutory returns, the strike-off process, limitation, and the explanation that the defaults were not intentional, together with the statutory requirements for notice, publication, and restoration. On the material placed, revival was found appropriate, subject to compliance with pending statutory filings and payment of costs, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>