"IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (Court – II) KOLKATA Appeal 38/KB/2023 An Appeal under Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013; In the matter of: (1) Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), Kolkata, Office at Aayakar Bhavan, 5th Floor, P- 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700069. …. Appellant/Petitioner -Versus- (2) THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, WEST BENGAL, having its office at Nizam Palace, 2nd MSO Building, 2nd Floor, 234/4, Acharya Jagdish Chandra Bose Road, Kolkata 700020. (3) M/s. GURUKUL COMMOSALES PRIVATE LIMITED (CIN – U74110WB2010PTC141207) & (PAN – AADCG6812G), having its office at 28/D, Nayan Chand Dutta Street, Kolkata – 700006, West Bengal. (4) Mr. Biplab Guha (DIN – 01299476), having its office at 28/D, Nayan Chand Dutta Street, Kolkata – 700006, West Bengal. (5) Mr. Devesh Upadhyaya (DIN – 01352020), having its office at 28/D, Nayan Chand Dutta Street, Kolkata – 700006, West Bengal. …. Respondents Date of Hearing: 07/11/2023 Date of pronouncing the Order: 02/01/2024 Coram: Smt. Bidisha Banerjee : Member (Judicial) Shri Arvind Devanathan : Member (Technical) Appearances (via video conferencing/physically): IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (Court – II) KOLKATA Appeal 38/KB/2023 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 4 O R D E R Per: Bidisha Banerjee, Member (Judicial) 1. This is an appeal preferred by Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(1), Kolkata under Section 252(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 for restoration of the name of the company M/s. GURUKUL COMMOSALES PRIVATE LIMITED in the register of Registrar of Companies, West Bengal. The name of the respondent company had been struck off on 24.08.2018. 2. Court Notice was issued to the respondent and to the company. Affidavit of service proving service of notice is filed. We are satisfied with proper delivery of notice. However, there is no representation by any of the directors of the struck off company. 3. The appellant contends that the name of the Respondent company had been struck off by the ROC, W.B., in compliance of the provisions under Sec. 248 (1) of the Companies Act, 2013 thereby the name of the respondent company had been removed from the Register of Companies and the said company was dissolved. 4. The appellant further contends that the proceedings under Section(s) 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are pending for the Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 against the Company and during the pendency of proceedings, the name of the respondent company had been struck off. Aggrieved by the order of striking off the name of the company, this application was filed by the Income Tax Officer praying for restoration of the respondent company to the register of Registrar of Companies and further to rectify the Master Data by modifying the status from ‘struck off’ to ‘active’. 5. It is discernible that as per paragraph 2 of CBDT letter F. No. 225/423/2017-1TA.II dated 29.12.2017, appeal for restoration of name of the struck off company shall be made by the Income Tax department if; IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (Court – II) KOLKATA Appeal 38/KB/2023 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 4 i. The proceedings under section 143(3)/144/147/153A/153C set aside cases were already in progress/pending or ii. Contemplated in future against the company, iii. Departmental appeals initiated were pending iv. Penalty proceedings already initiated were pending; v. Prosecution proceedings were initiated launched. 6. It is submitted that the respondent company has not paid income tax dues for Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 amounting to Rs. 4,35,81,600/- and the recovery proceedings u/s. 147 is pending against the respondent company and that the respondent company has committed serious violation of provisions of Income Tax Act rendering the entity liable to consequences as per the Income Tax Act. The restoration of the Company to take the pending proceedings to a logical conclusion. 7. Notices were issued to the respondents. ROC, W.B. has filed his report submitting that it has no objection to the application being allowed. 8. Upon hearing the arguments advanced on the side of the appellant and the Ld. ROC, West Bengal, and also in terms of the CBDT circular (supra), we are satisfied that the name of the respondent company is required to be restored to the Register of Companies since proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 are said to be pending for Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 against the Company. In these circumstances, if name of the company is not restored it would cause great prejudice to the appellant and loss of Revenue to the exchequer. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed by restoring the name of the company in the register of Registrar of Companies, West Bengal with a direction to modify the status of the company from \"struck off” to 'active' within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. 10. Appeal No. 38/KB/2023 is allowed and disposed of. IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH (Court – II) KOLKATA Appeal 38/KB/2023 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 4 11. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Free copy of the order will be provided to the appellant forthwith. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. Arvind Devanathan Bidisha Banerjee Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) Order signed on: 2nd of January, 2024. Ar. "