Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

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

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        2011 (4) TMI 1021 - 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

        Court approves Essar-India merger, rejects objections. Vodafone's locus standi questioned. Scheme benefits companies, shareholders, and creditors. The court sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation between M/s. Essar Telecommunication Holdings P. Ltd. and M/s. India Securities Ltd., rejecting objections ...
                      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.
                        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                          Court approves Essar-India merger, rejects objections. Vodafone's locus standi questioned. Scheme benefits companies, shareholders, and creditors.

                          The court sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation between M/s. Essar Telecommunication Holdings P. Ltd. and M/s. India Securities Ltd., rejecting objections from the Income-tax Department and M/s. Vodafone International BV. The court upheld the preliminary objection on the locus standi of M/s. Vodafone International BV to file objections, citing relevant legal precedents. The scheme was deemed beneficial for the companies, shareholders, and creditors involved. The court also fixed the remuneration for the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel at Rs. 5,000 per petition, to be paid by the petitioner-companies.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation between M/s. Essar Telecommunication Holdings P. Ltd. and M/s. India Securities Ltd.
                          2. Objections raised by the Income-tax Department.
                          3. Objections raised by M/s. Vodafone International BV.
                          4. Locus standi of M/s. Vodafone International BV to file objections.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Sanctioning the Scheme of Amalgamation:
                          The petitions were filed by M/s. Essar Telecommunication Holdings P. Ltd. (transferor company) and M/s. India Securities Ltd. (transferee company) to sanction a scheme of amalgamation effective from April 1, 2010. The scheme aimed at better management, unlocking value, and creating liquidity for shareholders. It involved the transfer of the entire undertaking of the transferor company to the transferee company. The board of directors of both companies approved the scheme on June 4, 2010. The scheme included specific provisions for the allotment of shares to the equity shareholders and debenture holders of the transferor company. The scheme was claimed to be beneficial for both companies, their shareholders, creditors, and the public interest.

                          2. Objections Raised by the Income-tax Department:
                          The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Circle 5(1), Mumbai, raised objections citing a demand of Rs. 487.46 crores against M/s. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. for the assessment year 2008-09. The court noted that there was no claim against the transferor or transferee company and that the demand against the holding company had been stayed by the appellate authority. Therefore, the objections of the Income-tax Department were rejected.

                          3. Objections Raised by M/s. Vodafone International BV:
                          M/s. Vodafone International BV raised several objections, including the valuation report's accuracy, the suppression of material facts, and the scheme's potential adverse impact on Vodafone Essar Ltd. They argued that the scheme was void under SEBI regulations and influenced the fair market value determination under the "FMV put option" agreement. The court noted that the objections regarding valuation had been addressed in the official liquidator's report. The court also observed that the scheme had been approved by the shareholders of the transferee company in a meeting held under the chairman appointed by the court.

                          4. Locus Standi of M/s. Vodafone International BV to File Objections:
                          The court upheld the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner-companies regarding the locus standi of M/s. Vodafone International BV. The court referred to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sequent Scientific Ltd., In re, which held that only creditors and shareholders could object to a scheme of amalgamation. The court also referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in S. K. Gupta v. K. P. Jain, which distinguished between sections 391 and 392 of the Companies Act, 1956. The court concluded that M/s. Vodafone International BV, being neither a shareholder nor a creditor, had no locus standi to file objections against the scheme of amalgamation.

                          Conclusion:
                          The scheme of amalgamation was found to be beneficial to both the transferor and transferee companies, their shareholders, and creditors. The court sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation, rejected the objections raised by the Income-tax Department and M/s. Vodafone International BV, and upheld the preliminary objection regarding the locus standi of M/s. Vodafone International BV. The remuneration for the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel was fixed at Rs. 5,000 for each petition, to be paid by the petitioner-companies.
                          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