A-2 Weekly Browser
With
regard
to
the
constitutional
validity
of
the
proviso
of
section
167 ( 1 )(
a
)
of^
the
Companies
Act,
2013 ,
the
Court
ruled
that,
the
said
provision
does
not
violate^
Article
19 ( 1 )(
g)
of
the
Constitution
as
it
is
made
in
the
interest
of
general
public^
and
a
reasonable
restriction
on
the
exercise
of
the
said
right.RoC was justified in striking off name of company from register of
cos. for failing to file returns since year 2004
Infinity Film Holdings (P.) Ltd. v. Registrar of Companies, Mumbai
[2019] 106 taxmann.com 229 (NCL-AT)
In
given
case,
the
appellant-company
was
incorporated
on
13 - 1 - 2009.
It
failed
to^
file
the
financial
statements
and
annual
returns
continuously
for
period
of
three^
financial
years
beginning
from
2014
and
thus,
committed
defaults
in
statutory^
compliances.
Registrar
of
Companies
(RoC)
slapped
statutory
notices
on^
the
appellant
which
were
not
responded
to
by
the
appellant.
Thus,
RoC
struck^
off
the
name
of
the
appellant-company
from
the
register
of
Registrar
of^
Companies.
After
sometime,
the
applicant-company
knocked
at
the
doors
of
tribunal
for
restoration^
of
its
name
in
registers
of
companies.
The
NCLT
by
impugned
order
dismissed^
the
appellant’s
restoration
application
on
ground
that
company
was
not^
in
operation
and
carrying
on
any
business.
Since
appellant-company
failed
to
prove
that
it
was
carrying
on
business
or
was^
in
operation
when
its
name
was
struck
off
by
not
even
responding
to
statutory^
notices,
impugned
order
passed
by
RoC
was
justified
and
did
not
require^
any
interferenceInsolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
Overdue towards goods supplied would be operational debt; CIRP
was to be admitted on default in payment
Bonus Plastics (P.) Ltd. v. Gopala Polyplast Ltd. [2019] 106 taxmann.
com 222 (NCLT - Ahd.)
The
operational
creditor
was
manufacturer
and
exporter
of
synthetic
fil
ament -
yarn,
narrow
woven
fabric,
polyster
webbings
etc.
The
Operational
creditor^
supplied
polypropylene
multifilament
yarn
to
the
corporate
debtor.
The^
Corporate
debtor
made
only
part
payment.
Despite
issuance
of
section
8
notice^
by
operational
creditor,
the
corporate
debtor
had
not
made
payment
of^
outstanding
amount
nor
raised
any
dispute.
Subsequent
to
initiation
of
in
stant -
insolvency
proceedings
by
the
operational
creditor,
the
corporate
debtor
approached^
the
operational
creditor
for
settlement
of
outstanding
amount.
In
pursuance^
to
same,
the
corporate
debtor
made
payment
of
two
instalments
but^
failed
to
make
payment
of
remaining
amount.