TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 807
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions) Act, 1985. The earlier registered Office of the Company was at Lucknow and recently, it has been shifted to Uttrakhand, however, after coming into force of the new companies Act, the Rules known as the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016 have been notified on 07.12.2016 and as per Sub-rule 2 of Rule 5 thereof all cases where opinion has been forwarded by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruct (BIFR), for winding up of a company to a High Court and where no appeal is pending, the proceedings for winding up initiated under the Act, pursuant to Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act. 1985, shall continue to be dealt with by such High Court in accordance with the provisions of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts order dated 04.10.2013 has recorded the factum of such publication having been made in the News Papers as directed by the Court. The record does not reveal that any claim has been filed by any employee or staff of the Company. The record reveals that vide order dated 23.05.2017 this Court had ordered for notice under Rule 24 of the Companies (Court) Rule for being issued and the record reveals that the said notices were issued/published, but, no claims have been received from any creditor vis-a-vis the Company. Vide order dated 16.07.2018 the Company was granted time to file latest audited balance sheet. Vide order dated 18.01.2020 the statement of the petitioner ? Company?s counsel, that the Company is in financial position to meet its ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... lac for the assessment year 1991-92 and 1992-93 mainly on account of dis-allowances of the depreciation claimed by the Company and in this regard also Appeal of the Company is pending adjudication. Contingent liability of Rs. 298.57 lakhs towards the Bank Guarantees also exists, which the Company has promised to indemnify the Bank of India for any future liability arriving thereon. The case filed by the beneficiaries is reported to have been dismissed in default. As per the affidavit of the Company filed along with the application dated 19.11.2019/06.12.2019 the assets of the Company far outweigh its liabilities. It further states that the creditor i.e. Bank of India at whose behest the proceedings were initiated before the BIFR, has alre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 15.11.2019. Refund of Rs. 4.03 crores with interest @ 8% per annum from the date the said amount was received from the Company by the U.P. State Sugar Corporation has also been awarded and this is the same amount which was realized by the Sugar Corporation allegedly by wrongly invoking and encashing the Bank Guarantee. It is said in the affidavit that the total amount with interest till the date of filing of the affidavit was about Rs. 30 Crores. The application of the State Sugar Corporation for setting-aside the award under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 has been rejected by the Civil Court and the Appeal filed against the same has also been dismissed by the High Court on 26.04.2018. The Special Leave Petition filed by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arbitration awards in its favour and the affidavit of Bank of India dated 29.04.2013 this Court is of the view that as the recommendation of the BIFR is not binding and conclusive upon this Court in view of the Division Bench judgment relied upon by the Company?s counsel upon the case of J. M. Malhotra (supra) which has been upheld by the Supreme Court, this Court is of the view that the recommendations of the BIFR can not be accepted at this belated stage for the aforesaid reasons and the proceedings for winding up are liable to be dropped. Even after requisite notification and publication as per Rules no one else has come forward claiming any amount from the Company as a creditor. Moreover, as already stated, the financial position of the....