<?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 979 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325795</link>
    <description>A scheme of amalgamation under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 was sanctioned where requisite consents were in place and shareholder and creditor meetings were properly dispensed with where permissible. Objections relating to SEBI compliance, FEMA and RBI guidelines were addressed through affidavits and accepted, including the position that no shares were being allotted under the scheme. The objection on reserves and Accounting Standard 14 was not accepted, and the Court directed compliance with the Income-tax Act and rules. The petitioners were also required to comply with all applicable laws and preserve statutory liabilities, after which the scheme was approved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 10:04:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 979 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325795</link>
      <description>A scheme of amalgamation under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 was sanctioned where requisite consents were in place and shareholder and creditor meetings were properly dispensed with where permissible. Objections relating to SEBI compliance, FEMA and RBI guidelines were addressed through affidavits and accepted, including the position that no shares were being allotted under the scheme. The objection on reserves and Accounting Standard 14 was not accepted, and the Court directed compliance with the Income-tax Act and rules. The petitioners were also required to comply with all applicable laws and preserve statutory liabilities, after which the scheme was approved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325795</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>