<?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>2017 (6) TMI 654 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344383</link>
    <description>A scheme of amalgamation was sanctioned because the required member and creditor approvals had been obtained, notices were duly issued and served, and no substantive stakeholder objection or public interest prejudice was found. The Official Liquidator reported no material objection, and remaining compliance concerns did not create a legal bar to approval, subject to continuing statutory compliance. The companies were also found not to be NBFCs under the principal business test, as the financial-assets and income thresholds were not met, so RBI registration and prior written permission were not required. The transferor companies&#039; assets and liabilities were ordered to vest in the transferee, and the transferors were directed to stand dissolved without winding up.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jun 2017 09:05:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=472364" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 654 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344383</link>
      <description>A scheme of amalgamation was sanctioned because the required member and creditor approvals had been obtained, notices were duly issued and served, and no substantive stakeholder objection or public interest prejudice was found. The Official Liquidator reported no material objection, and remaining compliance concerns did not create a legal bar to approval, subject to continuing statutory compliance. The companies were also found not to be NBFCs under the principal business test, as the financial-assets and income thresholds were not met, so RBI registration and prior written permission were not required. The transferor companies&#039; assets and liabilities were ordered to vest in the transferee, and the transferors were directed to stand dissolved without winding up.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344383</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>