2025 (9) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th. 3. The case of the petitioner club is as follows : (i) The petitioner was registered as a company limited by guarantee, incorporated on 02.5.1889 under the Indian Companies Act, 1882 (for short, the 1882 Act). The petitioner claims that they continued to be a company registered even under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. (ii) There is a long standing dispute between the petitioner club and the third respondent, who initiated various proceedings against the petitioner club under several fora. For the present, the proceedings initiated by the third respondent before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai is pending and the main relief sought for therein is for cancellation of the petitioner's registration as a com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act. This licence continues to be in force and it has not been revoked. Vide letter dated 24.1.2025, the petitioner requested the first respondent to issue a certificate stating that it has to be presented before the Income Tax Authorities. Believing the same, the certificate dated 24.1.2025 came to be issued. This certificate was used by the petitioner in a pending litigation before the NCLT, Chennai where respondents 1 and 2 are also parties. This was brought to the notice of the first respondent after the complaint was given by the third respondent to the second respondent. (ii) Therefore, a show cause notice was issued by the first respondent and after receiving the reply from the petitioner, by the impugned proceedings, the certifica....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... same and by the impugned proceedings, revoked the certificate dated 24.1.2025 issued in favour of the petitioner. Ultimately, the third respondent also sought for dismissal of this writ petition. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted as follows : The status of the petitioner club under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 cannot be called in question since it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was granted licence under Section 26 of the 1882 Act, which was never revoked. By virtue of Section 565 of the Companies Act, 1956, the status of the petitioner would continue upto the latest enactment of the year 2013 namely as a company registered under Section 8 the Companies Act, 2013. Hence, the certificate dated 24.1.2025 i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ai, he will also take an independent stand before the NCLT, Chennai with regard to the status of the petitioner club. That cannot be pre-empted by getting a certificate from the first respondent and producing the same before the NCLT, Chennai. This will tantamount to virtually giving an impression to the NCLT, Chennai as if the first respondent recognized the petitioner as a company registered under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. 10. The petitioner informed the first respondent that the certificate was required to be produced before the Income Tax Authorities and instead, utilized the certificate and produced before the NCLT, Chennai in the pending proceedings and other Courts. The certificate given by the first respondent was withd....