https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465671 In an appeal under s.252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking restoration of a struck-off company's name, the NCLAT held that restoration is warranted where material shows the company was carrying on business/operations or had subsisting assets and liabilities. The tribunal relied on audited accounts filed up to March 2020, income-tax returns up to AY 2020-21 as confirmed by the concerned tax officer, and evidence of substantial assets, liabilities, and ownership of property, plant, and machinery. It found that restoration would cause no prejudice and that it was just and equitable to restore the company's name. The appeal was allowed and the company's name ordered to be restored in the RoC records. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 14:26:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465671 In an appeal under s.252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 seeking restoration of a struck-off company's name, the NCLAT held that restoration is warranted where material shows the company was carrying on business/operations or had subsisting assets and liabilities. The tribunal relied on audited accounts filed up to March 2020, income-tax returns up to AY 2020-21 as confirmed by the concerned tax officer, and evidence of substantial assets, liabilities, and ownership of property, plant, and machinery. It found that restoration would cause no prejudice and that it was just and equitable to restore the company's name. The appeal was allowed and the company's name ordered to be restored in the RoC records. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465671