593
July 13 To July 19, 2019 u Taxmann’s Corporate Professionals Today u Vol. 45 u 67 ROC as w justifiedinstrikingoff
name ofco.fromregisterofcos.for
failing ot filereturnssinceyear 2004Infinity 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 interference
INSOLVENCY AND
BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 Overduetowardsgoodssuppliedwould
be rationalope debt;CIRPwastobe
admittedondefaultinpaymentBonus Plastics (P.) Ltd. v. Gopala Polyplast
Ltd. [2019] 106 taxmann.com 222 (NCLT - Ahd.)
The operational creditor was manufacturer and
exporter of synthetic filament yarn, narrow
woven fabric, polyester 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 instant
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.
The NCLT held that since amount due to
operational creditor from corporate debtor was
in respect of supply of goods, amount claimed
by operational creditor from corporate debtor
would be operational debt. The tribunal held
that the execution of settlement agreement
itself confirmed that operational debt was due
and payable. And therefore, the instant CIRP
application filed by operational creditor being
complete in all respect was to be admitted. NCLT admitsSBI’sInsolvencyplea
against JetAirwaysasithadhuge
outstandingdebtsState Bank of India v. Jet Airways (India)
Ltd. [2019] 106 taxmann.com 267 (NCLT -
Mum.)
The NCLT has admitted the Insolvency petition
filed by the financial creditor - State Bank
of India under section 7 of the Insolvency
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation
of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
(CIRP) against renowned airline, Jet Airways.
Along with the SBI, other two petitions
under the Code, 2016 were filed claiming
to be Operational Creditors of the corporate
debtor - Jet Airways. All-in-all, total amount
of debt granted to the Corporate Debtor by
the petitioner -SBI alone stands at `1795.21
Cr. There were several other financial creditors
who have also granted a loan to the CorporateWEEKLY REVIEW