<?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 (3) TMI 553 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325369</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the application seeking the recall of the order sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation, emphasizing the majority consent obtained, proper dispatch of notices, and the applicant&#039;s delayed response as reasons for upholding the original order. The court found no merit in the arguments presented regarding the reduction in equity stake, validity of the share exchange ratio and valuation, and the timeliness and motivation behind the application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2016 08:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 553 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325369</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the application seeking the recall of the order sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation, emphasizing the majority consent obtained, proper dispatch of notices, and the applicant&#039;s delayed response as reasons for upholding the original order. The court found no merit in the arguments presented regarding the reduction in equity stake, validity of the share exchange ratio and valuation, and the timeliness and motivation behind the application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325369</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>