<?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>2024 (4) TMI 1345 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465385</link>
    <description>A banking amalgamation may be left undisturbed where the regulator acts in public interest and the record shows financial deterioration and regulatory concern, but the process must still be transparent, reasoned, and properly recorded. The Court found deficiencies in disclosure of the draft scheme, objections, rejection of alternatives, and reasons for selection of the transferee bank, though the amalgamation itself stood. It also held that a zero write-down of shareholders&#039; value was unsustainable without a proper comparative valuation and assessment of assets, liabilities, deferred tax, and net worth, and directed reconsideration. The Tier II bond write-off was likewise required to be revisited after valuation and fresh decision-making.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2025 18:26:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=872812" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 1345 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465385</link>
      <description>A banking amalgamation may be left undisturbed where the regulator acts in public interest and the record shows financial deterioration and regulatory concern, but the process must still be transparent, reasoned, and properly recorded. The Court found deficiencies in disclosure of the draft scheme, objections, rejection of alternatives, and reasons for selection of the transferee bank, though the amalgamation itself stood. It also held that a zero write-down of shareholders&#039; value was unsustainable without a proper comparative valuation and assessment of assets, liabilities, deferred tax, and net worth, and directed reconsideration. The Tier II bond write-off was likewise required to be revisited after valuation and fresh decision-making.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>