Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        2002 (5) TMI 721 - HC - Companies Law

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Oppressive share allotments without notice can be set aside, while later foreign-investment regularisation may still validate earlier transfers. Prior Reserve Bank permission was not treated as essential to sustain an earlier allotment and transfer of shares to non-residents, because ex post facto ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Oppressive share allotments without notice can be set aside, while later foreign-investment regularisation may still validate earlier transfers.

                          Prior Reserve Bank permission was not treated as essential to sustain an earlier allotment and transfer of shares to non-residents, because ex post facto regularisation was recognised and the company could not retrospectively nullify the transaction after a long delay. By contrast, a later issue of shares to the managing director, carried out without notice to the majority shareholders and with the effect of transferring control and reducing them to a minority, was held to lack probity and bona fide corporate purpose. Such allotments were treated as oppressive and set aside, with rectification directed to restore the ownership structure to its pre-oppression position.




                          Issues: (i) Whether the earlier allotment and transfer of shares in favour of non-residents could be invalidated and the register of members rectified for want of prior Reserve Bank permission. (ii) Whether the subsequent allotment of shares to the managing director, without notice to the majority shareholders and in a manner reducing them to minority, amounted to oppression and warranted setting aside of the allotments.

                          Issue (i): Whether the earlier allotment and transfer of shares in favour of non-residents could be invalidated and the register of members rectified for want of prior Reserve Bank permission.

                          Analysis: The allotment and transfer had been made with the knowledge and at the instance of the company management, and the objection based on lack of prior permission was raised after a long lapse of time. The governing principle recognised by the Court was that Reserve Bank permission under the foreign exchange regime need not be restricted to prior permission alone, and ex post facto regularisation is legally permissible. In the circumstances, the company could not use the absence of prior permission to nullify the allotment retrospectively.

                          Conclusion: The challenge to the earlier allotment and transfer failed and rectification on that basis was not warranted.

                          Issue (ii): Whether the subsequent allotment of shares to the managing director, without notice to the majority shareholders and in a manner reducing them to minority, amounted to oppression and warranted setting aside of the allotments.

                          Analysis: The Court found that further shares were issued without notice to the then majority shareholders, that the increase in capital and allotments were engineered through meetings from which they were effectively excluded, and that the issue of shares had the effect of transferring control to the managing director. It applied the settled principle that directors' powers to issue shares must be exercised bona fide in the interests of the company and not to entrench control or defeat existing shareholder rights. The Court held that the allotments were made in a manner lacking probity and fair dealing and therefore constituted oppression. The remedial order of the Company Law Board, which had left the impugned allotments in place and substituted a buy-out at par with interest, was held to be unsustainable because it would reward the wrongdoer rather than undo the oppressive act.

                          Conclusion: The allotments made in the later board meetings were set aside and the register was directed to be rectified.

                          Final Conclusion: The non-resident shareholders retained their earlier allotment, while the later share issues made behind their back were invalidated for oppression and the company's ownership structure was directed to be restored to its pre-oppression position.

                          Ratio Decidendi: Share allotments that are made without notice to existing majority shareholders, with the object and effect of transferring control to management, are liable to be set aside as oppressive unless justified as a bona fide and necessary measure for the company's existence; absence of prior foreign-exchange permission does not by itself retrospectively invalidate an allotment where ex post facto regularisation is legally permissible.


                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found