<?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>1974 (5) TMI 34 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99138</link>
    <description>The court, in an application under section 17 of the Companies Act, 1956, approved the alteration of the memorandum of association for a company previously engaged in colliery business, now nationalized and seeking to diversify. Shareholders approved the alterations, creditors had no objections, and the company showed financial stability. The Registrar of Companies opposed, citing concerns about divergence from the original business activities. However, the judge ruled in favor of sanctioning the alteration, emphasizing the company&#039;s need to adapt post-nationalization, legality of proposed activities, and absence of fraudulent intent, ordering the company to update its name to reflect new ventures and bear application costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:49:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (5) TMI 34 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99138</link>
      <description>The court, in an application under section 17 of the Companies Act, 1956, approved the alteration of the memorandum of association for a company previously engaged in colliery business, now nationalized and seeking to diversify. Shareholders approved the alterations, creditors had no objections, and the company showed financial stability. The Registrar of Companies opposed, citing concerns about divergence from the original business activities. However, the judge ruled in favor of sanctioning the alteration, emphasizing the company&#039;s need to adapt post-nationalization, legality of proposed activities, and absence of fraudulent intent, ordering the company to update its name to reflect new ventures and bear application costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>