https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751061 Delhi HC dismissed an appeal challenging ROC's rejection of conversion from unlimited to limited liability company under Section 18 of Companies Act, 2013. The court held that appellant acquired no vested right upon filing application in 2014, and the relevant law applicable would be at the time of approval, not filing. Subsequently inserted Rule 37 requiring creditor NOCs was validly applicable. The ROC's insistence on stakeholder notifications was statutory and not arbitrary, as appellant had not challenged Rule 37's validity. en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751061 Delhi HC dismissed an appeal challenging ROC's rejection of conversion from unlimited to limited liability company under Section 18 of Companies Act, 2013. The court held that appellant acquired no vested right upon filing application in 2014, and the relevant law applicable would be at the time of approval, not filing. Subsequently inserted Rule 37 requiring creditor NOCs was validly applicable. The ROC's insistence on stakeholder notifications was statutory and not arbitrary, as appellant had not challenged Rule 37's validity. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751061