<?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>2014 (12) TMI 1437 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460239</link>
    <description>For voluntary delisting, the applicable public shareholding benchmark was the higher 20 per cent condition in the stock exchange listing arrangement, not the general 10 per cent norm in the SEBI framework. Rule 19(2)(b) of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 and the delisting guidelines were read together with the listing agreement and SEBI circular on continued listing. Where the company had expressly accepted a higher minimum non-promoter holding with the recognised stock exchange, that contractual benchmark governed testing delisting eligibility. On the facts, the delisting offer succeeded once shareholding fell below 20 per cent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2025 20:32:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=789529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 1437 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460239</link>
      <description>For voluntary delisting, the applicable public shareholding benchmark was the higher 20 per cent condition in the stock exchange listing arrangement, not the general 10 per cent norm in the SEBI framework. Rule 19(2)(b) of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules, 1957 and the delisting guidelines were read together with the listing agreement and SEBI circular on continued listing. Where the company had expressly accepted a higher minimum non-promoter holding with the recognised stock exchange, that contractual benchmark governed testing delisting eligibility. On the facts, the delisting offer succeeded once shareholding fell below 20 per cent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>