Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
901 to 920 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A composite scheme of amalgamation and demerger, once approved by shareholders and creditors, could not be narrowed by directing a separate demerger application or by altering the scheme's material terms. The NCLAT held that the scheme identified the amalgamated company, resulting company and demerged undertaking with sufficient specificity, and that demerger was an integral consequence of the sanctioned composite scheme under Sections 230 to 232. It also corrected factual errors in the sanction order concerning the effective date, the identity of the resulting company, and an unnecessary rider tied to an unadmitted petition. The order was set aside to the extent inconsistent with the approved scheme, while statutory dues, stamp duty, taxes and compliance obligations remained fully preserved.
A composite scheme of amalgamation and demerger, once approved by shareholders and creditors, could not be narrowed by directing a separate demerger application or by altering the scheme's material terms. The NCLAT held that the scheme identified the amalgamated company, resulting company and demerged undertaking with sufficient specificity, and that demerger was an integral consequence of the sanctioned composite scheme under Sections 230 to 232. It also corrected factual errors in the sanction order concerning the effective date, the identity of the resulting company, and an unnecessary rider tied to an unadmitted petition. The order was set aside to the extent inconsistent with the approved scheme, while statutory dues, stamp duty, taxes and compliance obligations remained fully preserved.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
