<?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>2013 (4) TMI 924 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280161</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the application for sanction of a Scheme of Arrangement and Amalgamation between two companies and their shareholders and creditors. The Court dispensed with meetings for one petitioner as all parties consented in writing, while meetings were held and approvals obtained for the other petitioner. The objections raised by the Regional Director were addressed by the petitioners, leading to the resolution of all issues. The Court directed certain amendments to the scheme, compliance with Companies Act formalities, and the inclusion of specific documents in the order. The petitioner companies were ordered to bear the costs of the application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568067" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 924 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280161</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the application for sanction of a Scheme of Arrangement and Amalgamation between two companies and their shareholders and creditors. The Court dispensed with meetings for one petitioner as all parties consented in writing, while meetings were held and approvals obtained for the other petitioner. The objections raised by the Regional Director were addressed by the petitioners, leading to the resolution of all issues. The Court directed certain amendments to the scheme, compliance with Companies Act formalities, and the inclusion of specific documents in the order. The petitioner companies were ordered to bear the costs of the application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280161</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>