https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397521 Selective reduction of share capital will not be disturbed where the shareholders were duly convened, participation in the voting process is evidenced, and objectors cannot show a denial of notice or opportunity. The Tribunal treated valuation as a fairness inquiry and accepted the reduction because the company relied on expert valuation, offered a premium over fair value, and no perversity or manifest unfairness was shown. It also held that the sanctioning authority may impose conditions in approval proceedings, including arrangements allowing dissenting shareholders to retain shares. On the record, no material illegality, procedural infirmity, or legal defect was made out, so the approval of the reduction was upheld. en-us Wed, 03 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 09:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397521 Selective reduction of share capital will not be disturbed where the shareholders were duly convened, participation in the voting process is evidenced, and objectors cannot show a denial of notice or opportunity. The Tribunal treated valuation as a fairness inquiry and accepted the reduction because the company relied on expert valuation, offered a premium over fair value, and no perversity or manifest unfairness was shown. It also held that the sanctioning authority may impose conditions in approval proceedings, including arrangements allowing dissenting shareholders to retain shares. On the record, no material illegality, procedural infirmity, or legal defect was made out, so the approval of the reduction was upheld. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 03 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397521