<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1166 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242951</link>
    <description>The Court sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation between a transferee company and a Mauritius-based transferor company under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The scheme was approved by both companies&#039; boards, advertised without objections, and deemed compliant with Mauritian laws. Despite objections from the Regional Director, the Court held that the amalgamation was permissible under Indian and foreign laws. The Court imposed conditions, including obtaining necessary approvals, compliance with RBI Act and FEMA, and removal of the transferor company&#039;s name from the Mauritian register. The Court granted the petition and ordered costs to be paid to the Central Government Standing Counsel.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2017 12:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1166 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242951</link>
      <description>The Court sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation between a transferee company and a Mauritius-based transferor company under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956. The scheme was approved by both companies&#039; boards, advertised without objections, and deemed compliant with Mauritian laws. Despite objections from the Regional Director, the Court held that the amalgamation was permissible under Indian and foreign laws. The Court imposed conditions, including obtaining necessary approvals, compliance with RBI Act and FEMA, and removal of the transferor company&#039;s name from the Mauritian register. The Court granted the petition and ordered costs to be paid to the Central Government Standing Counsel.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>