https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98556 In winding up proceedings, the court's interim powers may extend to restraining a non-party subsidiary where necessary to preserve assets and protect the subject matter of the proceedings, provided affected persons are heard. However, a subsidiary cannot be treated as a mere asset of its holding company simply because the holding company holds a majority stake. The Companies Act recognises the holding-subsidiary relationship for limited purposes, but separate corporate personality remains the general rule and the corporate veil is lifted only where statute or clear facts justify it. On the facts, a bare majority shareholding and possible loss of control did not justify treating the subsidiary as part of the holding company's property. en-us Thu, 26 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98556 In winding up proceedings, the court's interim powers may extend to restraining a non-party subsidiary where necessary to preserve assets and protect the subject matter of the proceedings, provided affected persons are heard. However, a subsidiary cannot be treated as a mere asset of its holding company simply because the holding company holds a majority stake. The Companies Act recognises the holding-subsidiary relationship for limited purposes, but separate corporate personality remains the general rule and the corporate veil is lifted only where statute or clear facts justify it. On the facts, a bare majority shareholding and possible loss of control did not justify treating the subsidiary as part of the holding company's property. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 26 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98556