Pros and Cons of Voluntary Closure for LLP and OPC

Voluntary closure (under Section 59 of the LLP Act, 2008 for LLPs, and Section 59 of the Companies Act, 2013 for OPCs) is a formal process where the entity itself applies to the Registrar of Companies (ROC) to be dissolved after settling all liabilities. Striking off, on the other hand, is initiated by the ROC when the entity has not been carrying on business for a continuous period of two years or more.

In voluntary closure, the LLP or OPC files Form 24 (for LLPs) or Form STK-2 (for OPCs) along with an affidavit, statement of accounts, and indemnity bond. The ROC then issues a notice of proposed strike-off, publishes it in the Official Gazette, and after 30 days, the entity is dissolved. Striking off is a simpler, cheaper route but carries the risk of the ROC rejecting the application if the entity has any assets, liabilities, or pending compliances.

The primary advantage of voluntary closure is that it provides a clean and legally recognised exit. Once the ROC issues the dissolution order, the LLP ceases to exist, and its partners are no longer liable for any future claims (except for pre-existing liabilities that were not disclosed). This is particularly useful if the LLP has assets, debts, or ongoing contracts that need to be formally wound up.

Another benefit is that voluntary closure allows the partners to settle all dues—including taxes, statutory payments, and third-party claims—before dissolution. This reduces the risk of personal liability for partners, which can arise if the LLP is struck off without proper closure. Additionally, the process is relatively straightforward for LLPs that have been inactive, as the MCA has simplified the procedure for LLPs with nil assets and liabilities.

The main disadvantage for an OPC is the cost and time involved. The process typically takes 3 to 6 months, and the ROC may require additional documents or clarifications, extending the timeline. The government fee for filing Form STK-2 is currently ₹5,000, and professional fees for a chartered accountant or company secretary can range from ₹10,000 to ₹30,000, depending on the complexity.

Another drawback is that the OPC must be fully compliant with all annual filings (Form AOC-4, MGT-7) up to the date of closure. If the OPC has missed any filings, the ROC will reject the application until those are completed, which adds to the cost and time. Additionally, the OPC cannot have any pending litigation, tax demands, or statutory dues. If any such issue exists, the ROC will not approve the closure, and the entity may have to opt for a more expensive winding-up process through the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

Voluntary closure for an LLP costs significantly more than striking off. The government fee for filing Form 24 is ₹500, but professional fees for preparing the affidavit, statement of accounts, and indemnity bond typically range from ₹5,000 to ₹15,000. In contrast, striking off under Section 59 of the LLP Act requires only a simple application (Form 24) with a declaration of no business activity, and the ROC does not charge a separate fee for striking off.

However, the lower cost of striking off comes with risks. If the ROC finds that the LLP has any assets, liabilities, or pending compliances, it may reject the application and issue a show-cause notice. In such cases, the partners may have to file a fresh application for voluntary closure, incurring additional costs. For LLPs with any financial activity, voluntary closure is the safer and more reliable option.

The primary compliance risk is that the ROC may reject the application if the OPC has any outstanding statutory dues, pending tax returns, or unresolved complaints from creditors or employees. The OPC must also ensure that all annual returns and financial statements are filed up to the date of closure. If any filing is missed, the ROC will not process the application, and the OPC will remain on the register, accruing late filing fees and penalties.

Another risk is that the ROC may issue a notice of proposed strike-off, which is published in the Official Gazette. If any person objects within 30 days, the ROC will investigate the objection. If the objection is valid (e.g., an unpaid creditor), the ROC will reject the closure application, and the OPC may have to go through the NCLT winding-up process, which is far more expensive and time-consuming. To mitigate these risks, it is advisable to engage a professional to verify that all compliances are in order before filing.

If your LLP or OPC has no assets, liabilities, or pending compliances, voluntary closure is a clean and efficient option. However, if you have any doubts about your compliance status or outstanding dues, consult a qualified company secretary or chartered accountant to review your records before filing.

---

This page provides preliminary information. It is not legal advice. For your matter, consult a qualified professional.