AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1509
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct. - (1) Where in respect of any deposit accepted by a company before the commencement of this Act, the amount of such deposit or part thereof or any interest due thereon remains unpaid on such commencement or becomes due at any time thereafter, the company shall- (a) file, within a period of three months from such commencement or from the date on which such payment are due, with the Registrar a statement of all the deposits accepted by the company and sums remaining unpaid on such amount with the interest payable thereon along with the arrangements made for such repayment, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or under the terms and conditions subject to which the deposit was accepted or any sch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to force w.e.f. 6th June, 2014. Under the new dispensation, by virtue of the legislative command in Section 74(1), the company was obliged to repay the said amounts within the period prescribed, it being indicated in the original enactment to be one year, from the date of commencement of the new law or from the date on which the payments were to fall due, whichever was earlier, the said period prescribed in Section 74(1) (b) having been later revised and modified to three years in terms of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2017. The law, however, would permit a company under the statutory liability to seek enlargement of time for discharge of liability to pay by making an application before National Company Law Tribunal ("the tribunal") under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 74(2) the Companies Act, 2013 by the aforementioned order dated 04.07.2016 of the tribunal, the ROC filed a criminal complaint (CC No.01/2016) in the court of sessions, it being allocated to an Additional Sessions Judge. Since the complaint was presented by a public servant (authorized officer of ROC), the pre-summoning inquiry was dispensed with. Upon consideration of the facts set out in the complaint, and the documents filed therewith, taking note of the dismissal of the petition under Section 74(2) of the Companies Act, 2013 by the tribunal, the Additional Session Judges took cognizance by order dated 20.09.2016 and summoned the company and five of its officers as accused to appear and answer the charge for the offence under Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ticeably, by the said date the ROC, in part compliance of the directions of the tribunal had already presented criminal complaint and as it so happened on the same date, the criminal court had taken cognizance on the said complaint and had issued process. Be that as it may, on 26.10.2016 the appellate tribunal, inter alia, directed that the request of the tribunal in the order dated 04.07.2016 to the ROC to take action under Section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 was "stayed". This order again would be of no consequence inasmuch as the complaint had already been filed and the matter was within seisin of the competent criminal court, it being beyond the jurisdiction of the appellate tribunal to inhibit any action on the part of the crimina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is due to depositors, this Appellate Tribunal is not inclined to grant any further time to the appellant. 24. For the reason aforesaid, the interim order of stay passed by this Appellate Tribunal is vacated. We find no ground to extend the period beyond 31st December, 2016, as was allowed earlier." 10. It is the submission of the petitioners, and this court finds substance in the same, that by virtue of the order dated 03.11.2016, the period of compliance with the requirement of Section 74(1) of the Companies Act, 2013, as extended earlier by the tribunal in the company petition in terms of order dated 11.03.2016 stood further extended upto 31.12.2016 pursuant to directions of the appellate tribunal in appeal. This remains the factual pos....