AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter, "DCD Grand"). He has been disqualified as a director under Section 164 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter the "Act") with effect from 1st November 2017, due to the alleged non-compliance by DCDPL in filing its returns from 2014-2017. The Directors Identification Number (hereinafter, 'DIN') and Digital Signature Certificate (hereinafter, 'DSC') of the Petitioner have also been frozen, though the name of the company, DCDPL has not been struck off and it continues to be an active company. 3. The prayers in the writ petition are that the publication of the name of the Petitioner in the list of disqualified directors ought to be set aside and quashed and that the Petitioner should not be treated as a disqualified director under Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er, the same does not extend to cure the disqualification of the directors. The relevant paragraph of the affidavit is extracted below: - "13. That the Company Fresh Start Scheme (CFSS), 2020 is applicable for defaulting active companies to file the belated document and doesn't not extent to cure the disqualification of directors as disqualified directors are not eligible to file return on behalf of company. If there are no authorised signatories/director left in the company to file documents in CFSS 2020, then the company may approach the jurisdictional ROC with formal request to add one new director to avail CFSS, 2020 from backend and file the belated documents. However, in the company Delhi Control Devices Private Limited, the other t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame reads: "98. In view of the above, the petitioners would not demit their office on account of disqualifications incurred under Section 164 (2) of the Act by virtue of Section 167(1)(a) of the Act prior to the statutory amendments introduced with effect from 07.05.2018. However, if they suffer any of the disqualifications under Section 164(2) on or after 07.05.2018, the clear implication of the provisos to Section 164(2) and 167(1)(a) of the Act are that they would demit their office in all companies other than the defaulting company". The judgment in Mukut Pathak (supra) is stated to have been appealed against, before the ld. Division Bench, however there is no stay against the judgment. Thus, as on date, the judgment would continue t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enactment of the Proviso to Section 167(1)(a) and also the decision in Mukut Pathak (supra). 10. The DIN of the Petitioner herein was deactivated and he was disqualified prior to the proviso to Section 167(1)(a) taking effect. Thus, qua ABMR and DCD Grand, the Petitioner's disqualification is not sustainable in view of paragraph 98 of Mukut Pathak (supra). 11. Coming to the second aspect, i.e., whether the Petitioner can be considered as a Director in DCDPL, again in view of para 98 of Mukut Pathak (supra), the Petitioner would not demit his office in the defaulting company. The ROC's stand that the shareholders can nominate a new director and approval for the same can be sought, would not be an answer, as the same could in effect result ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an file the belated documents, which were due for filing on any given date, as per the Scheme. Normal fee would be payable for such filing by the defaulting company under the Companies (Registration Offices and Fee) Rules, 2014 and no additional fee shall be payable; v. To the extent that any prosecution has been launched or penalty has been imposed for the delay associated with the filings of belated documents, it provides that the same shall not be launched and immunity has been provided; vi) Applications can be made for seeking immunity in respect of belated documents. Once the documents are taken on file or approved by the designated authority, such applications would have to be filed within six months from the date of closure of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ective, Directors of these companies ought to be given an opportunity to avail of the Scheme. The launch of the Scheme itself constitutes a fresh and a continuing cause of action. Under such circumstances, the question of delay or limitation would not arise. The ld. Division Bench did not have an occasion in the case of Anamika Devi (supra) and Gaurav Kumar (supra) to consider this Scheme." 13. The Scheme is a fresh lease of life given to defaulting companies, which are not yet declared `Inactive', to file their returns and do their businesses in accordance with law. The purpose being one to enable businesses, to limit the economic disruption caused due to COVID-19, ought to be interpreted in a manner so as to not render the objective of t....