2006 (12) TMI 543

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y proposed to be amalgamated with Shilchar Payton Technologies Ltd., the wholly owned subsidiary of the applicant Transferee Company, has prayed for an appropriate order by holding that separate proceedings as required to be taken out under the provisions of Section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956 are not required to be undertaken by the applicant company. 2. It is the contention on behalf of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ely to undergo any change and the rights of the existing shareholders of the Transferee Company are not affected in any manner. Relying upon the following decisions reported in Company Cases and Tax Law Reporter, 1. 48 Co. Cases 23 (Del.) Sharat Hardware Industries Private Limited. 2. 105 Co.Cases 16(B0m.) Mahaamba Investments Limited v. IDI Limited. 3. 1977 Tax Law Reporter 1805 (Del.) C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dgments referred to hereinabove, holding that separate proceedings are not necessary for the Transferee Company being the Holding Company, it is held in the present case also that separate proceedings, as required to be taken out under the provisions of Section 391(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, are not required to be undertaken by the applicant Company. This application is accordingly allowed to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X