<?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>2006 (2) TMI 288 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110736</link>
    <description>The Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, dismissing objections raised by the Regional Director, Ministry of Company Affairs. The objections regarding clubbing of authorised capital limits and compliance with specific sections of the Companies Act were rejected. The Court emphasized the subsidiary relationship between the transferor and transferee companies, allowing for a single application. The Scheme was found compliant with legal procedures, with no adverse impact on creditors or employees, directing dissolution without winding up and awarding a fee to the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:20:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147752" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 288 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110736</link>
      <description>The Court sanctioned the Scheme of Amalgamation under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, dismissing objections raised by the Regional Director, Ministry of Company Affairs. The objections regarding clubbing of authorised capital limits and compliance with specific sections of the Companies Act were rejected. The Court emphasized the subsidiary relationship between the transferor and transferee companies, allowing for a single application. The Scheme was found compliant with legal procedures, with no adverse impact on creditors or employees, directing dissolution without winding up and awarding a fee to the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>