<?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 (4) TMI 1467 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314419</link>
    <description>A scheme of arrangement and compromise between a company and its shareholders was sanctioned where the procedural requirements were satisfied, including shareholder consent, no objection from secured creditors, and a no-objection report from the Regional Director. The scheme was treated as compliant with the Companies Act, 1956 because it did not prejudice any stakeholder, did not violate statutory provisions, and was considered fair, just, sound, and not opposed to public policy or public interest. The absence of any pending proceeding under Sections 231 to 237 further supported sanction of the arrangement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2024 20:46:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=755710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1467 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314419</link>
      <description>A scheme of arrangement and compromise between a company and its shareholders was sanctioned where the procedural requirements were satisfied, including shareholder consent, no objection from secured creditors, and a no-objection report from the Regional Director. The scheme was treated as compliant with the Companies Act, 1956 because it did not prejudice any stakeholder, did not violate statutory provisions, and was considered fair, just, sound, and not opposed to public policy or public interest. The absence of any pending proceeding under Sections 231 to 237 further supported sanction of the arrangement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>