<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1960 (7) TMI 43 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97826</link>
    <description>The court upheld the single judge&#039;s decision in a case involving rectification of a company&#039;s register of members due to share transfers. The Union of India sought rectification for eight shares, with the court allowing rectification for two shares but dismissing it for the remaining six due to incomplete transactions. The court held that stamp duty liability rested with the transferor, rejecting the Union&#039;s claim for exemption as a government transferee. The completion of share transfer transactions and validity of transfer deeds were key considerations, with the court affirming the single judge&#039;s rulings and dismissing both appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:12:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (7) TMI 43 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97826</link>
      <description>The court upheld the single judge&#039;s decision in a case involving rectification of a company&#039;s register of members due to share transfers. The Union of India sought rectification for eight shares, with the court allowing rectification for two shares but dismissing it for the remaining six due to incomplete transactions. The court held that stamp duty liability rested with the transferor, rejecting the Union&#039;s claim for exemption as a government transferee. The completion of share transfer transactions and validity of transfer deeds were key considerations, with the court affirming the single judge&#039;s rulings and dismissing both appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>