Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging a scheme of arrangement between ICICI Bank and ICICI Securities. The Tribunal found that SEBI's relaxation from reverse book building requirements was within its regulatory powers under Regulation 42 of the Delisting Regulations. The valuation complied with Regulation 37(2)(j), meeting the minimum 60-day VWAP requirement. The court affirmed that valuation determinations should be left to accounting experts. ICICI Bank's shareholder outreach did not constitute undue influence, and disclosures in the explanatory statement were deemed sufficient. The appellant lacked standing to object under Section 230(4) of the Companies Act, 2013, and failed to demonstrate any procedural illegality or prejudice to public shareholders.
The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging a scheme of arrangement between ICICI Bank and ICICI Securities. The Tribunal found that SEBI's relaxation from reverse book building requirements was within its regulatory powers under Regulation 42 of the Delisting Regulations. The valuation complied with Regulation 37(2)(j), meeting the minimum 60-day VWAP requirement. The court affirmed that valuation determinations should be left to accounting experts. ICICI Bank's shareholder outreach did not constitute undue influence, and disclosures in the explanatory statement were deemed sufficient. The appellant lacked standing to object under Section 230(4) of the Companies Act, 2013, and failed to demonstrate any procedural illegality or prejudice to public shareholders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
