<?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>2009 (9) TMI 577 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113912</link>
    <description>The proposed amalgamation was approved because the required consents had already led to dispensation of the meetings of equity shareholders and unsecured creditors of the transferor companies, and the transferee company&#039;s meeting was also dispensed with. The Official Liquidator reported no prejudice to members or the public interest, the Central Government raised no objection, and no adverse circumstance was brought to notice. The earlier direction dispensing with the procedure under section 101(2) for reduction of share capital was also noted, and the scheme with its ancillary procedural requirements was sanctioned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2014 18:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 577 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113912</link>
      <description>The proposed amalgamation was approved because the required consents had already led to dispensation of the meetings of equity shareholders and unsecured creditors of the transferor companies, and the transferee company&#039;s meeting was also dispensed with. The Official Liquidator reported no prejudice to members or the public interest, the Central Government raised no objection, and no adverse circumstance was brought to notice. The earlier direction dispensing with the procedure under section 101(2) for reduction of share capital was also noted, and the scheme with its ancillary procedural requirements was sanctioned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113912</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>