2024 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 3628
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Registrar of Companies Cum Official Liquidator VS
Appeal - 1/2022
For the Petitioner:SHYAM SUNDER
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH (COURT-I)
Company Appeal No. 1/CHD/HP/2022
IN THE MATTER OF:
Registrar Of Companies Cum Official Liquidator,
Himachal Pradesh Having his office at:
Plot No. 4-B, 1st Floor, Corporate Bhawan,
Sector 27-B, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh (UT)
…Appellant/Applicant
Versus
1. PVR Builders Private Limited Through Its Managing Director,
CIN: U45200HP2009PTC031042
Regd. Office: Near Petrol Pump, Main Bazar,
Kangra, HP- 176001. … Respondent No. 1
2. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
North Western Region,
Ayakar Bhawan, Sector-17E Chandigarh-160017.
… Respondent No. 2
Section: 252 of the Companies Act, 2013
Judgement Delivered on: 09.09.2024
CORAM
SH. HARNAM SINGH THAKUR, HON’BLE MEMBER (J)
SH. ARVIND DEVANATHAN, HON’BLE MEMBER (T)
PRESENT:
For the Appellant : Mr. Piyush Khanna, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel
for Income Tax Dept.
Judgement
PER: SH. HARNAM SINGH THAKUR, M(J) & SH. ARVIND DEVANATHAN, M(T)
The Registrar of Companies Cum Official Liquidator, Himachal Pradesh has preferred the present Appeal under Section 252(1) read with Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013, on being aggrieved by their own action in striking off the name of PVR Builders Private Limited (“the Company”/R-1).
2. It is stated by the Appellant that “the Company” is an unlisted Private Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 12.02.2009 with CIN No. U45200HP2009PTC031042. The Authorised Share capital of the Company is Rs. 40,00,000/- and the Company’s paid-up capital is Rs. 1,05,000/-. The Registered Office of the Company is situated at near Petrol Pump, Main Bazar, Kangra, HP- 176001, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
3. It is stated by the Appellant that the RoC Himachal Pradesh initiated proceedings under Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013, and struck off the name of the Company from its Register vide Notice No. STK 5 dated 20.05.2017. The name of the Appellant Company appeared at serial no. 198 of the list of Companies, whose names were struck off and dissolved due to default in statutory compliances.
4. It is further stated by the Appellant that the CIN of the present company (R-1) was published against the name of two companies vide Notice No. STK 5 dated 20.05.2017, viz. PVR Builders Private Limited and Devi Singh Construction Private Limited. A copy of the said public notice is annexed as Annexure A-3. Thereafter, the form STK-7 was published in the Gazette of India No. 20 dated 29th July-4th August, 2017 and under Part Ill Section 1, the name of the company PVR Construction was not mentioned. However, due to an error, the CIN of the Company got erringly mentioned before the name of another company Devi Singh Construction Private Limited. A copy of the said Gazette Notification has been annexed as Annexure A-4.
5. The Appellant, based on the records maintained by the office, struck off the name of the company from the register of companies as per the provisions of Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 and rules and regulations made thereunder due to default in making the statutory compliances i.e., non-filing of annual returns and financial statements of the company with the office of the Registrar. The company has not made any filing of the statutory documents since its incorporation.
6. It is stated by the Appellant that the ROC/Department came to know that the name of the company got struck off from the register of companies inadvertently as the factum of charge was overlooked and even CIN was mentioned qua two companies. The company has an outstanding charge of Rs. 91,20,000/- (Rs. Ninety-One Lacs, Twenty Thousand only) with the Charge-holder Punjab National Bank, Branch Gaggal, Kangra, H.P. The said charge was registered with the office of the applicant by filing Form 8 vide SRN A83807933 dated
31.03.2010. The said form with attachments thereto is annexed as Annexure A-2.
7. It is further stated by the Appellant that the great prejudice will