TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 1845
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent") as a company limited by shares on 12.03.1982 vide Certificate of Incorporation No. 55-013281with the object of carrying on the business, inter alia, of electrical appliances and equipments. Presently, the registered office of the petitioner is stated to be situated at C-39, Flatted Complex, Jhandewalan, New Delhi- 110055. 3. The respondent initiated the proceedings under S.560 of the Companies Act, 1956 to strike the name of the petitioner off the register due to defaults in statutory compliances, namely, non-filing of Annual Returns from 30.09.2001 to 30.09.2014, and Balance Sheets from 31.03.2001 to 30.03.2014. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that procedure under S.560 was duly followed, with notices/letter as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner-company was not carrying on its business was either provided to the petitioner or was available on the records maintained with the respondent. 6. It has been averred on behalf of the respondent that though the notices/letters under S.560(1) and (3) were sent, their copies and dispatch proof are not traceable. On examination of annexures, it appears that the address of the registered office of the petitioner in the records of the respondent is incorrect. However, the petitioner has not placed on record any proof of intimation of the change of the address of its registered office, to the respondent.Therefore,it is entirely possible that the respondent had sent notices under S.560 to the petitioner on the old address of its register....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents along with filing fee and additional fee etc., as applicable on the date of actual filing. 10.In Purushottamdass and Anr. (BulakidasMohta Co. P. Ltd.) v. Registrar of Companies, Maharashtra, &Ors., (1986) 60 Comp Cas 154 (Bom), the Bombay High Courthas held, inter alia, that; "18. The object of section 560(6) of the Companies Act is to give a chance to the company, its members and creditors to revive the company which has been struck off by the Registrar of Companies, within a period of 20 years, and to give them an opportunity of carrying on the business only after the company judge is satisfied that such restoration is necessary in the interests of justice." This decision has been followed by this Court in Pancham Hotels Pvt....