<?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 696 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325512</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petitions seeking sanction of a de-merger scheme under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956. It found that the company lacked a genuine pre-existing real estate division and that the scheme seemed designed to evade tax obligations, contrary to public interest and the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized its supervisory role to ensure fairness and legality, ultimately ruling against the petitioner company.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 696 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325512</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petitions seeking sanction of a de-merger scheme under Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956. It found that the company lacked a genuine pre-existing real estate division and that the scheme seemed designed to evade tax obligations, contrary to public interest and the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court emphasized its supervisory role to ensure fairness and legality, ultimately ruling against the petitioner company.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>