<?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>1997 (2) TMI 410 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103394</link>
    <description>After a scheme of amalgamation is sanctioned, no fresh notice to the Central Government is required at the stage of dissolution of the transferor company without winding up, because section 394A contemplates notice when the scheme is first placed before the court for sanction. Dissolution is only a consequential step to the approved scheme. The relevant safeguard is the second proviso to section 394(1), which permits dissolution only if the official liquidator reports that the company&#039;s affairs were not conducted prejudicially to members or public interest. Here, the official liquidator&#039;s report disclosed no impediment, so dissolution was fit to be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:32:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 410 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103394</link>
      <description>After a scheme of amalgamation is sanctioned, no fresh notice to the Central Government is required at the stage of dissolution of the transferor company without winding up, because section 394A contemplates notice when the scheme is first placed before the court for sanction. Dissolution is only a consequential step to the approved scheme. The relevant safeguard is the second proviso to section 394(1), which permits dissolution only if the official liquidator reports that the company&#039;s affairs were not conducted prejudicially to members or public interest. Here, the official liquidator&#039;s report disclosed no impediment, so dissolution was fit to be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103394</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>