Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 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 4817 
Join Channel 
