Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT upheld the capital reduction scheme under Section 66 of Companies Act, 2013. The tribunal found the selective capital reduction permissible, with 99.92% shareholder approval validating the minority shareholders' compulsory exit. The E&Y valuation at Rs. 196.80 per share was deemed independent and appropriate, rejecting arguments for control premium. The tribunal confirmed no violation of Section 102, noting no mandatory requirement to attach valuation reports for capital reduction. The 25% Discount for Liquidity of Marketability was justified. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, validating the company's capital reduction process and protecting majority shareholder interests.
NCLAT upheld the capital reduction scheme under Section 66 of Companies Act, 2013. The tribunal found the selective capital reduction permissible, with 99.92% shareholder approval validating the minority shareholders' compulsory exit. The E&Y valuation at Rs. 196.80 per share was deemed independent and appropriate, rejecting arguments for control premium. The tribunal confirmed no violation of Section 102, noting no mandatory requirement to attach valuation reports for capital reduction. The 25% Discount for Liquidity of Marketability was justified. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, validating the company's capital reduction process and protecting majority shareholder interests.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
