<?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>2016 (2) TMI 686 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271981</link>
    <description>The Court granted sanction to the Scheme of Amalgamation involving three companies under Sections 391 to 394 of The Companies Act, 1956. Dispensation of meetings for equity shareholders was allowed based on written consent. Despite observations by the Regional Director, the Court approved the scheme, directing preservation of books of account, statutory compliance, and post-amalgamation liabilities. The Court emphasized record preservation and compliance with laws, with petitioners instructed to submit necessary documents within a specified timeframe. Costs were awarded to the Central Government and Official Liquidator, and the petitions were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:24:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 686 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271981</link>
      <description>The Court granted sanction to the Scheme of Amalgamation involving three companies under Sections 391 to 394 of The Companies Act, 1956. Dispensation of meetings for equity shareholders was allowed based on written consent. Despite observations by the Regional Director, the Court approved the scheme, directing preservation of books of account, statutory compliance, and post-amalgamation liabilities. The Court emphasized record preservation and compliance with laws, with petitioners instructed to submit necessary documents within a specified timeframe. Costs were awarded to the Central Government and Official Liquidator, and the petitions were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>