https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428540 A shareholder's application for restoration of a struck-off company's name under section 252(3) was treated as competent and within limitation because the company was struck off on 08.02.2022 and the appeal was filed on 23.06.2022. The Tribunal also found, on the material before it, that the company had been operating as a going concern and that revival was just and equitable despite defaults in filing financial statements and annual returns. Restoration of the company's name was therefore allowed subject to compliance directions, including filing pending statutory documents and payment of costs. en-us Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Oct 2022 08:51:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428540 A shareholder's application for restoration of a struck-off company's name under section 252(3) was treated as competent and within limitation because the company was struck off on 08.02.2022 and the appeal was filed on 23.06.2022. The Tribunal also found, on the material before it, that the company had been operating as a going concern and that revival was just and equitable despite defaults in filing financial statements and annual returns. Restoration of the company's name was therefore allowed subject to compliance directions, including filing pending statutory documents and payment of costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428540