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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        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

        <h1>Companies Act Scheme of Amalgamation Approved by Court</h1> The court approved a scheme of amalgamation under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, involving two companies, with consent from shareholders ... Scheme of amalgamation - dispensation of convening meetings - Held that:- Consent have been obtained from the equity shareholders of both the applicants. In these circumstances, in so far as the equity shareholders of the applicants are concerned, the requirement to convene their meetings is dispensed with. As far as the unsecured creditors are concerned, in the case of the transferor company 39 out of 46 have given their consent. The percentage of consents in terms of value and number is as follows: 97.44% in value 84.78% in number. As regards the unsecured creditors of the transferee company, it is averred that 33 out of the total 35 have given their consent. A scrutiny of the documents filed alongwith joint application has revealed that one of the unsecured creditors has given its consent to the scheme prior to the scheme being sanctioned by the BOD of the transferee company. Notwithstanding the aforesaid discrepancy, the percentage of consents in terms of value and number are as follows: 97.28% in value and 91.43% in number. Accordingly, the prayer made for dispensing with the requirement of convening meetings of the unsecured creditors of the applicants is allowed. The reason for allowing the prayer made for dispensation of the requirement of convening meetings of the unsecured creditors of the applicants, is that, the percentage of consent given, in value, in both these cases is above 75%. The joint application stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Issues: Application under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 for scheme of amalgamation; Jurisdiction of the court; Details of transferor and transferee companies; Approval of scheme by Board of Directors; Consent of shareholders and unsecured creditors; Dispensation of meetings for equity shareholders and unsecured creditors.Analysis:The judgment pertains to a joint application under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 for a proposed scheme of amalgamation involving two companies, namely the Transferor Company and the Transferee Company. The Transferor Company, originally named Haskoning India Private Limited, later changed its name to HaskoningDHV India Private Limited, while the Transferee Company, initially known as M.D.P. Consultants Private Limited, changed its name to HaskoningDHV Consulting Private Limited. The application includes details of the authorized, issued, subscribed, and paid-up capital of both companies, along with their Memorandum and Articles of Association and latest audited annual accounts. The jurisdiction of the court is established as the registered offices of both companies are located within the National Capital Territory of Delhi.The judgment highlights that the scheme has been approved by the respective Board of Directors of both companies, as evidenced by the filed resolutions. It further discusses the consent obtained from shareholders and unsecured creditors of the companies. The table provided in the judgment shows the number of shareholders and unsecured creditors, along with the percentage of consent obtained from them for the scheme. Notably, consent has been obtained from the equity shareholders of both companies, leading to the dispensation of the requirement to convene their meetings. Regarding unsecured creditors, the judgment details the percentage of consents obtained in terms of value and number for both companies.The judgment allows the prayer for dispensing with the requirement of convening meetings of the unsecured creditors of the companies, as the percentage of consent given by them, in value, exceeds 75%. This decision is based on the high percentage of consents obtained from the unsecured creditors. Ultimately, the joint application is allowed in the aforementioned terms, with a directive for 'Dasti,' indicating the issuance of necessary copies.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found