AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 424
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ectors Mr. Gulshan Kumar Gulati, invoking the provisions of Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the name of the Appellant Company in the register of the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi and Haryana ('RoC'). 2. As per the averments, M/s. Llyod Logistics System Private Limited was incorporated as a Private Limited Company on 27.12.2001 under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 with CIN No. U72200DL2001PTC113595 and having its registered office at 5645/77, Regharpura, Karol Bagh, New Delhi - 110005, which is within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. 3. It was submitted by the Appellant Company that the main objects of the Appellant Company, inter alia, are as under: "1. To carry on business of man....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sell or otherwise dispose of and, generally, to deal in and with data processing, desktop publishing, computer training in hardware software and world processing. 6. To carry on the business of software for computer data processing machines, types cards, memory equipment or any other equipment's and any other equipment and materials of every kind and description, to licence or otherwise authorise others to engage in general research and development in the areas related to the business of the company. 7. To provide consultancy services in India and abroad on selection of computer systems, software, media, peripherals and allied items, computer personnel and on computerisation in general. 8. To hold seminars, c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 2007-08 to 2016-17. 5. That on 03.07.2008, a settlement was arrived at between the appellant and his brother Mr. Jagdish Kumar Gulati, whereby the responsibilities and management including the management, compliances and administration of the appellant company was to be taken care of by Mr. Jagdish Gulati. Thereafter, appellant further came to now that one of the Director being Mr. Jagdish Gulati resigned from the directorship of the company and Mr. Girindra Biswas had been inducted as a new director. 6. The Appellant Company in order to justify its restoration in the name of the Register of Company has relied upon the financial statement and books of accounts pertaining to the year 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21. 7. That the RoC h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompany is carrying out its business or is in operation or otherwise it is just that the name of the company be restored, this Tribunal can order the RoC to restore the name of the company in the Register of Companies. 10. The name of the Appellant Company was struck off from the Register of ROC on 30.06.2017 and the present appeal is filed on 06.02.2020. Hence the present appeal is not barred by limitation. 11. After going through the Appeal, documents placed on record and reply, we make the following observations: a) the Appellant company in its MOA has enumerated a wide range of business activities which it was carrying on prior to the striking off. But, the Appellant company has not produced any documents or proof, such as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s complying with all the statutory requirements. Also, stated that the company is still carrying on business and is in operation and conducting annual general meetings and, maintains the audited balance sheets. However, the Appellant Company has failed to place on record the financial statement or any other sufficient proof to show that it was earning revenue from business operations immediately two years prior to the striking off. Moreover, vide additional affidavit dated 30.05.2022, the appellant has placed on record the balance sheet for the financial years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 which reflects revenue from operation is 'NIL' for both the financial years. Further, the other income reflected for financial, years on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... years from the publication in Official Gazette of notice under Section 248(5). The exercise of such power is properly regulated and depends upon satisfaction of the Tribunal that the Company at the time of its name being struck off was carrying on business - or in operation or otherwise it is 'just' that the name of company be restored. We do not find ourselves persuaded to agree with the preposition canvassed by learned counsel for the Appellant that inspite of Appellant's inability to demonstrate that the Company was at the relevant time carrying on business or in operation, the Tribunal had. vast powers to order restoration of Company on the ground, "or otherwise". This term "or otherwise" has been judiciously used by the le....