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
  • 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
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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>Approval of Amalgamation Scheme After Valuation Rectification</h1> <h3>In Re: Patiala Starch and Chemical Works Ltd., Rajpura</h3> In Re: Patiala Starch and Chemical Works Ltd., Rajpura - AIR 1958 P & H 30 Issues Involved:1. Petition for amalgamation under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956.2. Application for winding-up under Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956.3. Validity and fairness of the proposed scheme of arrangement.4. Proper representation and voting at the shareholders' meeting.5. Valuation of the company's assets.6. Bona fides of the scheme and the interests of the directors.Detailed Analysis:1. Petition for Amalgamation under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956:The Patiala Starch and Chemical Works Limited (the Company) filed a petition under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking approval for a scheme of arrangement for amalgamation with Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co., Ltd. The scheme proposed that the members of the transferor company would receive one share of Rs. 10 in the transferee company for every ten shares held in the transferor company.2. Application for Winding-up under Section 439 of the Companies Act, 1956:The Registrar of Companies, PEPSU and Himachal Pradesh, filed an application under Section 439 for the winding-up of the Company due to its continued financial losses and inability to revive its business despite various attempts. The Registrar argued that the business had remained suspended for five years and the company had incurred heavy losses.3. Validity and Fairness of the Proposed Scheme of Arrangement:The scheme's fairness was challenged by seventeen shareholders who contended that the scheme was not based on correct and complete information, and that the heavy losses indicated in the balance sheets were falsely inflated. They argued that the management was guilty of misconduct and that the scheme was designed to prevent an inquiry into matters requiring investigation. The objectors believed that the shareholders would get a fair deal if the company was sent into liquidation.4. Proper Representation and Voting at the Shareholders' Meeting:The meeting to consider the scheme was held on 25th August 1956, and the scheme was passed with the requisite statutory majority. However, objections were raised regarding the validity of certain proxies, including one from a significant shareholder, His Highness the Rajpramukh, which was declared invalid due to being unstamped and received late. The objectors argued that the meeting did not fairly represent the shareholders' interests, as some significant shareholders were unable to vote.5. Valuation of the Company's Assets:The objectors argued that there had been no proper valuation of the company's assets by an expert, and that the assets were deliberately undervalued to coerce shareholders into accepting the scheme. The company's balance sheet as of 31st March 1956 showed net assets valued at nearly Rs. 12,50,000, but the company claimed that the market value was only fifty percent of this amount.6. Bona Fides of the Scheme and the Interests of the Directors:The objectors contended that the scheme was not bona fide and was designed to benefit the directors, some of whom had interests in both the transferor and transferee companies. They argued that the shareholders were not getting a fair price for their shares and that the scheme was not backed by a genuine majority.Court's Decision:Initial Order (26-4-1957):The court found that the scheme suffered from material defects, including the lack of proper valuation of the company's assets and inadequate representation at the shareholders' meeting. The court was not satisfied that the scheme was fair and reasonable from the perspective of an independent and honest shareholder. Therefore, the court directed that another meeting be convened to reconsider the scheme, with proper valuation of the company's assets by an expert and adequate representation of the shareholders.Final Order (9-8-1957):After the reconvened meeting, the chairman's report indicated that the scheme was passed unanimously, and no objections were filed in court. The valuation report was accepted as correct. Consequently, the court sanctioned the scheme, resulting in the transfer of the whole undertaking, property, and liabilities of the transferor company to the transferee company. The transferor company was to be dissolved without winding up after three months from the date of the order, unless an appeal was filed. The court also provided for the appropriated allotment of shares to the members of the transferor company and allowed the transferee company to apply for further orders as necessary to ensure the effective implementation of the amalgamation.Conclusion:The court ultimately sanctioned the scheme of arrangement after ensuring proper valuation of assets and adequate representation of shareholders, thereby facilitating the amalgamation of the Patiala Starch and Chemical Works Limited with Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co., Ltd. The decision balanced the interests of the shareholders, creditors, and the company's future viability.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found