The Companies Compliance Facilitation Scheme, 2026 (CCFS-2026) introduced by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs provides a limited compliance window from 15 April 2026 to 15 July 2026 .
While the Scheme is widely recognised as a relief mechanism for defaulting companies, its deeper significance lies in its practical impact on revival of struck-off companies under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013.
For companies whose names have been removed from the Register under Section 248, CCFS-2026 materially improves the financial and legal feasibility of restoration through the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).
This article analyses:
The legal position relating to strike-off under Section 248
The statutory remedy under Section 252
The relevance of CCFS-2026 in revival proceedings
Strategic considerations for directors, shareholders and creditors
For a broader understanding of the Scheme itself, readers may refer to our earlier article on CCFS-2026. We have also previously discussed the legal framework governing revival of struck-off companies.
I. Strike-Off Under Section 248 – A Brief Overview
Section 248 of the Companies Act, 2013 empowers the Registrar of Companies (ROC) to remove the name of a company from the register where, inter alia:
The company has failed to commence business; or
It is not carrying on any business or operations for two preceding financial years; or
Statutory filings remain persistently defaulted.
Upon completion of statutory procedure and publication of notice, the company’s name is struck off and it is notified as dissolved.
In practice, many companies are struck off primarily due to prolonged non-filing of:
Annual Returns
Financial Statements
The financial burden arising from accumulated additional filing fees (₹100 per day without upper cap) often makes regularisation difficult.
It is in this context that CCFS-2026 assumes importance.
II. Statutory Remedy: Section 252 – Appeal to Tribunal
The restoration of a struck-off company is governed by Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013, which provides as follows:
Appeal to Tribunal
252. (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Registrar, notifying a company as dissolved under section 248, may file an appeal to the Tribunal within a period of three years from the date of the order of the Registrar and if the Tribunal is of the opinion that the removal of the name of the company from the register of companies is not justified in view of the absence of any of the grounds on which the order was passed by the Registrar, it may order restoration of the name of the company in the register of companies:
Provided that before passing any order under this section, the Tribunal shall give a reasonable opportunity of making representations and of being heard to the Registrar, the company and all the persons concerned:
Provided further that if the Registrar is satisfied, that the name of the company has been struck off from the register of companies either inadvertently or on the basis of incorrect information furnished by the company or its directors, which requires restoration in the register of companies, he may within a period of three years from the date of passing of the order dissolving the company under section 248, file an application before the Tribunal seeking restoration of name of such company.
(2) A copy of the order passed by the Tribunal shall be filed by the company with the Registrar within thirty days from the date of the order and on receipt of the order, the Registrar shall cause the name of the company to be restored in the register of companies and shall issue a fresh certificate of incorporation.
(3) If a company, or any member or creditor or workman thereof feels aggrieved by the company having its name struck off from the register of companies, the Tribunal on an application made by the company, member, creditor or workman before the expiry of twenty years from the publication in the Official Gazette of the notice under sub-section (5) of section 248 may, if satisfied that the company was, at the time of its name being struck off, carrying on business or in operation or otherwise it is just that the name of the company be restored to the register of companies, order the name of the company to be restored to the register of companies, and the Tribunal may, by the order, give such other directions and make such provisions as deemed just for placing the company and all other persons in the same position as nearly as may be as if the name of the company had not been struck off from the register of companies.
III. Key Principles Emerging from Section 252
From the statutory language, the following principles are clear:
Appeal period of 3 years (in certain cases).
Extended jurisdiction up to 20 years under sub-section (3).
Restoration may be granted if:
The company was carrying on business; or
It was in operation; or
It is otherwise “just” to restore.
The expression “otherwise it is just” gives the Tribunal wide equitable jurisdiction.
Tribunals have repeatedly restored companies where:
Immovable property is held in company’s name
Bank accounts require operation
Tax assessments are pending
Litigation is ongoing
Stakeholder interests require protection
IV. How CCFS-2026 Strengthens Revival Cases
The Companies Compliance Facilitation Scheme, 2026 permits companies to file pending annual returns and financial statements by paying only 10% of the additional fees otherwise payable .
Although a struck-off company must first obtain restoration before filing, the Scheme significantly strengthens revival petitions in the following ways:
1. Demonstrating Genuine Intention to Regularise
When approaching NCLT under Section 252, directors can place on record:
Willingness to immediately complete pending filings
Commitment to pay reduced additional fees under CCFS-2026
Intention to restore statutory compliance
This demonstrates bona fides and regulatory alignment.
2. Financial Feasibility of Compliance
In many cases, revival was previously impractical due to:
Accumulated additional filing fees running into lakhs
Adjudication exposure
With only 10% of additional fees payable under CCFS-2026 revival becomes economically viable.
This shifts the Tribunal’s consideration from theoretical restoration to practical compliance.
3. Protection of Corporate Assets
Struck-off companies often hold:
Land and buildings
Investments
Receivables
Intellectual property
Ongoing contractual rights
Without restoration, enforcement and transactional complications arise.
Section 252 restoration, followed by compliance under CCFS-2026, provides structured continuity.
V. When Should Revival Be Considered?
Revival under Section 252 should be evaluated where:
The company owns immovable property
There are pending arbitration or court proceedings
Directors intend to resume business
Tax or regulatory matters remain unresolved
Assets remain in the company’s name
Each case must be fact-specific.
VI. Post-Restoration Compliance Path
Upon restoration order:
Certified copy of NCLT order must be filed with ROC within 30 days (Section 252(2)).
ROC restores name and issues fresh Certificate of Incorporation.
Pending annual filings are completed.
Reduced additional fees under CCFS-2026 are paid within the scheme window.
Given the Scheme’s limited period (15 April 2026 to 15 July 2026)
CCFS-26-ESIGNED-20260224
, timing becomes crucial.
VII. A Structured Compliance Reset
CCFS-2026 should be understood as a compliance facilitation measure — not an automatic revival mechanism.
Restoration under Section 252 requires:
Proper pleadings
Evidence of business or just cause
Affidavits and documentation
Tribunal satisfaction
However, the Scheme materially enhances the practicality of restoration once ordered.
Conclusion
The Companies Compliance Facilitation Scheme, 2026 presents a significant opportunity for directors, shareholders and creditors of struck-off companies to consider revival under Section 252 of the Companies Act, 2013.
By combining:
Tribunal-ordered restoration, and
Reduced additional fee compliance under CCFS-2026 companies can effectively reset their regulatory position.
Given the limited duration of the Scheme, early legal assessment is advisable where revival is contemplated.
Disclaimer
This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or solicitation. Restoration proceedings depend on individual facts and applicable law.