Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Section 252(3) Appeal Dismissed: Court Rejects Company's Name Restoration Due to Excessive Procedural Delays

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The SC dismissed an appeal concerning restoration of a company's name to the Register under Section 252(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Despite the appellant's valid argument that time spent pursuing a review petition should be excluded, the Court noted significant delays at every procedural stage: four months in filing the restoration application, five months in filing the review petition after NCLT dismissal, and over one year in appealing to NCLAT after the review petition was rejected. The SC upheld NCLAT's refusal to condone the delay, noting Section 421 of the Companies Act only permits condonation for delays up to forty-five days, and the appellant provided no justification for the extensive delays.....