Efficient Investment Consultants Pvt ... vs Income Tax Officer & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 154 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Payment of the tax dues by a company does not, by itself, establish that a company whose name is sought to be restored under section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 is not liable to continue to face tax proceedings; where the Income Tax Department shows that assessment or reassessment proceedings against the company or its directors remain pending, that pendency is a sufficient ground on which the Tribunal may decline to interfere with an order refusing restoration of the company's name.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
M/s. Efficient Investment Consultants Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Anil Verma, Chartered Accountant
For Respondent : Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Easha Kadian, Advocate for Income Tax Deptt.
ORDER
08.07.2019 This appeal has been preferred by 'M/s. Efficient Investment
Consultants Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.' against the order dated 7th May, 2019 passed by
the 'National Company Law Tribunal' New Delhi, Bench-II (hereinafter referred
to as the 'Tribunal') in Appeal No. 893/252/ND/2018 in which the Tribunal
entertained the application filed u/s 252 of the Companies Act, 2013 for
restoration of the name of the Appellant's Company namely 'M/s. Efficient
Investment Consultants Pvt. Ltd.' Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Appellant submits that the tax amount payable to the Income-Tax Department
has already been paid and there was no reason to restore of the name of the
company.
2. Ms. Easha Kadian, Advocate appears on behalf of the Income Tax
Department and submits that for tax evasion, a notice has been issued to the
Directors of the Company for the Assessment Year 2011-2012 and for -2-
subsequent years, which are pending. It is also submitted that the Income-Tax
Department has also issued notice on 30th March, 2018 u/s 148 of the Income
Tax Act to the Respondent Company. In view of such stand taken by the Income
Tax Department, we are not inclined to interfere in the impugned order merely
on the ground that the company has paid the Income Tax. We find no merit in
the Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)
[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/gc
Company Appeal (AT) No. 154 of 2019
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free