The corporate landscape in India has been redefined through the Companies Act, 2013, which aims to promote transparency, accountability, and fair business conduct. However, with the increasing ease of incorporation and digital filing processes, instances of fraudulent company registrations, shell entities, and wrongful incorporations have also emerged. Recognizing this, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has been vested with significant powers to scrutinize, cancel, or even dissolve companies incorporated with mala fide intent or through misrepresentation.

This article explores the extent of NCLT’s powers to cancel registrations and dissolve companies under the Act, the legal basis for such actions, procedural aspects, and the broader implications for corporate governance.

1. The Legislative Framework: Companies Act, 2013

The Companies Act, 2013, provides a robust statutory mechanism to regulate the process of incorporation and functioning of companies in India. While the Act simplified company registration to encourage entrepreneurship, it also built safeguards to deal with fraudulent or wrongful incorporations.

The principal provision empowering the NCLT in this regard is Section 7(7) of the Companies Act, 2013 (‘the Act’). This section specifically empowers the Tribunal to take corrective and punitive action where a company has been incorporated based on false or misleading information or through the suppression of material facts.

Additionally, Sections 248 to 252 empower the Registrar of Companies (ROC) and the NCLT to strike off and restore the name of companies under certain circumstances, including non-operation, misrepresentation, or fraud.

2. Section 7(7): Power to Cancel Incorporation

Section 7(7) states that if, on an application made to the Tribunal, it is found that the incorporation of a company has been obtained by furnishing false or incorrect information, or by suppressing material facts, or through any fraudulent means, the NCLT may:

a. Pass orders for the removal of the company’s name from the register of companies;

b. Direct the company to change its name within a specified period.

c. Dissolve the company entirely; or

d. Take any other measures as it deems fit.

This power allows the NCLT to undo the very act of incorporation—a significant authority that reflects the seriousness with which the legislature views fraudulent registrations.

Importantly, the section also holds the individuals responsible for the fraud personally liable, including promoters, first directors, or persons furnishing false information. This aligns with the principle that incorporation cannot shield fraud or misrepresentation.

3. Key Grounds for Cancellation or Dissolution

The NCLT can intervene in company incorporations under several circumstances, such as:

a. False Declarations at Incorporation: If promoters submit false statements or fake documents while filing for registration under Section 7(1), it constitutes a ground for cancellation.

b. Suppression of Material Facts: Failure to disclose crucial information regarding directors, shareholding, or capital structure can invite scrutiny.

c. Fraudulent Purpose: Where a company has been set up merely to act as a shell, launder money, evade taxes, or defraud creditors, it may be struck off or dissolved.

d. Misuse of Corporate Veil: When incorporation is used to conceal illegal activities or siphon funds, the Tribunal can lift the corporate veil to identify real beneficiaries and dissolve the entity.

4. The Role of the Registrar and Initiation of Proceedings

In most cases, the Registrar of Companies (ROC) initiates proceedings by reporting to the NCLT after identifying discrepancies or suspicious incorporation patterns. The ROC may act upon:

a. Complaints from shareholders, creditors, or government agencies;

b. Information from financial intelligence units or tax authorities; or

c. Its own inspection findings under Section 206 or inquiry under Section 210.

Once the ROC establishes prima facie evidence of misrepresentation or fraud, it files a petition before the NCLT under Section 7(7) seeking appropriate orders.

5. NCLT’s Procedure and Judicial Approach

When a petition reaches the NCLT, it follows a quasi-judicial process involving:

a. Issue of notice to the company and its promoters/directors;

b. Opportunity to be heard by the concerned parties;

c. Examination of documents such as incorporation forms, affidavits, and declarations;

d. Evaluation of the intent behind incorporation—whether genuine or fraudulent.

The Tribunal often distinguishes between procedural lapses (which may be rectifiable) and fraudulent incorporations (which warrant dissolution). In cases involving deliberate falsification or misrepresentation, the NCLT has not hesitated to pass orders of dissolution or cancellation.

For instance, in Registrar of Companies v. M/s. Bimla Devi Developers Pvt. Ltd., the NCLT found that the company’s incorporation documents contained forged signatures and fictitious addresses. The Tribunal directed the company’s name to be struck off and held the directors liable.

6. Interplay with Sections 248–252 (Striking Off and Restoration)

While Section 7(7) focuses on wrongful incorporation, Sections 248–252 empower the ROC to strike off companies that have failed to commence business, remained inactive for two years, or operated in violation of statutory provisions.

However, when the striking off involves fraudulent incorporation or misrepresentation, the NCLT’s powers under Section 7(7) are broader and more conclusive since they allow complete dissolution and penal consequences.

In contrast, a company struck off under Section 248 can apply for restoration under Section 252, provided it proves genuine business activity or procedural error—a leeway not readily available when incorporation itself is found to be fraudulent.

7. Consequences of NCLT’s Orders

When the NCLT cancels the incorporation or dissolves a company:

a. The company ceases to exist as a legal entity.

b. Assets and liabilities are dealt with as per the Tribunal’s directions.

c. Promoters and directors may face penal action under Section 447 for fraud.

d. Creditors and investors may approach the NCLT or civil courts for recovery or relief.

Furthermore, under Section 7(6), persons knowingly furnishing false information are punishable with imprisonment up to five years and fines up to ₹10 lakh.

8. Implications for Corporate Governance

The power of the NCLT to cancel wrongful incorporations has a profound impact on corporate discipline. It acts as a deterrent against:

a. Use of shell entities for illicit transactions;

b. Identity theft or document forgery during registration;

c. Misrepresentation of beneficial ownership; and

d. Corporate structures created for money laundering or tax evasion.

Such enforcement strengthens investor confidence and enhances India’s image as a jurisdiction committed to transparency and integrity in business practices.

Conclusion

The incorporation of a company marks the birth of a legal person. However, when that birth itself is tainted with fraud or deception, the law cannot allow such an entity to survive. Through Section 7(7) and related provisions, the NCLT functions as a gatekeeper—ensuring that the privilege of corporate personality is not abused.

By exercising its powers to cancel registrations and dissolve wrongfully incorporated companies, the Tribunal not only enforces compliance but also reaffirms the core principle that corporate existence is a privilege, not a shield for misconduct.

As India continues to digitalize and liberalize its business environment, the vigilance of regulatory bodies and tribunals will remain critical to maintaining the integrity of its corporate framework.

For any clarifications or queries, please feel free to reach out to us at admin@fintracadvisors.com

Disclaimer

The content published on this blog is for informational purposes only. The opinions expressed here are solely those of the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Fintrac Advisors. No warranties are made regarding this information’s completeness, reliability, or accuracy. Any actions taken based on the information presented in this blog are solely at the reader’s risk, and we will not be liable for any losses or damages resulting from its use. It is recommended that professional expertise be sought for such matters. External links on this blog may direct users to third-party sites beyond our control. We do not take responsibility for their nature, content, or availability.