<?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>1963 (9) TMI 32 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98069</link>
    <description>An alteration of a company&#039;s objects clause may be sanctioned where the proposed new business is not inconsistent with the existing business and can be conveniently and advantageously combined with it. The proposed manufacture of steel goods was held compatible with the company&#039;s sugar, oil and allied activities, but the objects clause was too wide because it included &quot;brass founders, metal workers&quot; and the vague term &quot;etcetera.&quot; The court therefore approved the amendment only after deleting those expressions and imposing a reasonable safeguard requiring a separate profit and loss account for the new business for five successive years.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:06:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1963 (9) TMI 32 - HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98069</link>
      <description>An alteration of a company&#039;s objects clause may be sanctioned where the proposed new business is not inconsistent with the existing business and can be conveniently and advantageously combined with it. The proposed manufacture of steel goods was held compatible with the company&#039;s sugar, oil and allied activities, but the objects clause was too wide because it included &quot;brass founders, metal workers&quot; and the vague term &quot;etcetera.&quot; The court therefore approved the amendment only after deleting those expressions and imposing a reasonable safeguard requiring a separate profit and loss account for the new business for five successive years.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 1963 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>