Advanced Search Results

National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Mahara ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Sales TaxCompany

Acts : Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Sections 33C; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 391 and 394; Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy and Amendment) Act, 2002

Reported in : [2004]118CompCas556(Bom); (2004)2CompLJ160(Bom); [2004]51SCL629(Bom); [2004]135STC50(Bom)

J.P. Devadhar, J.1. By the Maharashtra Tax Laws (Levy and Amendment) Act, 2002, published on May 4, 2002, Section 33C has been inserted into the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ('the … is not competent to declare that for the purposes of sales tax, the date of amalgamation of the companies shall not be from the date declared by the court or the Central Government under the Companies Act, … by the court or the Central Government under the above Act and secondly, assuming the State has such legislative competence, then, such power cannot be … authority, however, by an order dated March 31, 1998, passed under Section 55(6) of the BST Act, rejected the contention of the petitioners and held

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others. Vs. Securitie ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Companies

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Section 55A(b), 55A(c), 56, 57, 58, 60B, 60B(1), (2), 2(19A), 60B(9), 235 to 241, 73, 73(1)(2A), 209-A , 68A(1)(a), 2(45AA), 81(1A), 234(1), 234(4)(a), 67(3), 62, 63, 108A, 109, 110, 117A, 117B, 117C, 56, 62, 63, 642, 642(4), 2(19A); Securities and Exchange Board of India (Disclosure and Investor Protection) Guidelines, 2000 ; Securities and Exchange Board of India (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2009 - Regulations 3, 6, 2(zc), 2(p), 2(n), 4(2), 5(1), 6, 7, 16(1), 20(1), 25, 26, 36, 37, 46, 57; Securities and Exchange Board of India(SEBI) Act 1992 - Section 11C, 11A, 15Z, 55A, 68A, 77A, 80A, 108, 109, 110 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 206, 206A, 207, 59 to 81,; Companies (Central Government's) General Rules and Forms, 1956 - Rule 4CC, Form No. 2A,; Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act(SCR), 1956 - Section 2(h), 21, 73(1)(3), 28, 28(1)(b), 20; Companies (Amendment) Act, 2000 - Section 55A, 67(3); Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 - Section 2(19B), 60B(9), 60B(1)(2)(3), ; Constitution of India - Articles 129, ; Companies Act, 2006 - Sections 755, 760,; Food Safety Modernization(FSMA), Act 2000 - Section 85; Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Section 45I(f) ; Companies Amendment Act 53 of 2000 - Section 81(1A); Insurance Act, 1938 - Section 2; Securities Laws (Amendment) Act, 1995 - Sections 13, 16, 28(1)(b), 28(2); Indian Evidence Act - Section 114 ; Companies (Central Government's) General Rules and Forms, 1956 - Rule 4CC, 4D; Unlisted Public Companies (Preferential Allotment) Rules, 2003 - Rule 2,; UPC (PA) Amendment Rules 2011 ; SCR Rules - Rule 19; Unlisted Public Companies (Preferential Allotment) Amendment Rules 2011

Reported in : (2013)1SCC1

a recognized stock exchange. Section 60B, as already indicated, refers to IM. Section 2(19B) was inserted by the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1.4.2003, which reads as follows:“2(19B) "information memorandum" means a process undertaken prior to the filing of a … the strength and weakness of the company, its creditworthiness, credence and confidence of promoters and the company’s prospects. Section 55 of the Act provides that a prospectus issued by or on behalf of a company or in relation

Raghunath Rai Bareja and anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : BankingLimitation

Acts : Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 136; Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 446, 446(1) and 446(3); Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - Sections 17, 18, 19, 24, 31, 31(1) and 34; Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Order 34, Rule 11; Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 - Rule 9, 10 and 117; Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227

Reported in : 2007(2)ALT114(SC); 2007(1)AWC507(SC); [2007]135CompCas163(SC); (2007)1CompLJ108(SC); 2007(5)CTC642; 2007(3)MhLj83; 2007MPLJ306(SC); 2006(13)SCALE511; (2007)2SCC230; 2006AIRSCW6446

16. In this connection, it may be mentioned that Section 446(3) of the Companies Act was omitted by Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 and evidently the High Court has overlooked this Amendment. As a result in our opinion the High Court … and then on 22.7.1999 recalled the order dated 1.4.1999.9. On 3.1.2005, the decree-holder Bank filed Company Application No. 55 of 2005 under Rule 9 of the Company (Court) Rules, 1959 read with Sections 17 and 18 of

Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited Vs. Amit Gupta

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Courts.4. It is stated that the recommendations of the Eradi Committee were accepted by the Government and Company (Second Amendment) Act, 2002 was passed providing for establishment of NCLT and NCLAT to take-over the functions which are being performed by … provides that the State Commission shall discharge the function of adjudicating ―the disputes between the licensees, and generating companies and to refer any dispute for arbitration‖. Therefore, any issue in relation to the PPA must be raised … JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. They are: A The appeal B The genesis of … of the PPA, the compensation for termination of the PPA is Rs 55.80 crores; and (c) The issues relating to tariff determination and replacement of

Sharath Rukmangada and Another Vs. Cauvery Papers Limited (In Liqn), R ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Company

or before or after commencement of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1960] (65 of 1960) (3) ***Omitted by the Companies (Second Amendment Act) Act, 2002 (4) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub- section (3) shall apply to any proceeding pending in … of the exceptions carved out in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari Vs. Antarim Zila Parishad Manu/SC/0399/1968: AIR 1969 SC 556; Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade marks, Mumbai Manu/SC/0664/1998: (1998)8 SCC 1 and Harbanslal Sahnia and Anr Vs.

Arcelormittal India Private Limited Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

provisions of Sections 15 to 21 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. Interestingly, the Companies Amendment Act, 2002 omitted a provision similar to Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. Consequently, creditors … and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2017, together with the amendment made by the Insolvency and 40 Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018. Section 29A, as introduced by the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2017, on 23.11.2017, reads as … entered into any fraudulent, sham, circuitous device so as to overcome statutory 55 provisions like Section 29(1)(a). It is trite law that any approval/permission obtained

P.Kumar Vs. Secretary to Government

Court : Chennai

Subject : Education

for the petitioner would submit that Chapter IV A of the Companies Act was introduced by means of Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002. He would further submit that as per the said amendment, in the place of ".Company Law Board"., ".Tribunal". … Government Arts College, Nandanam. This Court had the benefit of hearing them also. According to them, as per Section 388-E of the Act, which was introduced by means of Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, the ".Tribunal". alone … answers in Commerce subject. The petitioner challenges key answers to Question Nos. 55, 61, 73, 77, 90, 102, 103, 111 and 150 in ".B". Series.15.

Commisisoner of Income Tax Delhi vs.sunil Lamba

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

capital receipt and not a revenue receipt. Even the amendment of Section 28 (5) (a) of the Finance Act, 2002 with effect from 1st April, 2003 bringing such receipts to tax as business income, was held in Guffic … assets but for assets that had been acquired by the Assessee over the period from different firms and companies. It was submitted that any transfer from a firm or a limited company to a partner or a … Delhi and Gaylord Restaurant, Bombay allotted to be taken over by the Second Group shall belong to the Second Group together with exclusive right to … with the Assessee for no consideration. Such payment became taxable under Section 55(2) (a) of the Act by virtue of the amendment introduced by the

Arun Kumar Jagatramka Vs. Jindal Steel And Power Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

second amendment was made to various provisions of IBC, including Section 29A, under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018, effective from 6 June 2018. A proviso was added to sub-Section (g) of Section 29A. Section 29A … scheme of compromise and arrangement under Section 230 of 4 5 the Companies Act, 2013 . The judgment was rendered in an appeal filed by … of India under Section 3 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002); (e) an Alternate Investment Fund registered with the Securities and Exchange Board of India; (f) … sale of the corporate debtor or its business as a going concern. 55 Regulation 32-A(1) then stipulates: “32A. Sale as a going concern. (1) Where

Justice k.s.puttaswamy(retd) Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

or decree of the Supreme Court.” 73. Relying on Section 6(2), which was introduced by way of the Amendment Act, 2002 (Act 14 of 2002) that came into force from 6-8-2002, it is submitted by Mr Rohatgi that the … to foreign entities or entities under the ownership and control of foreign companies and corporations. The entire framework and working of the authentication procedure in … to be eligible for government subsidies and social safety net programmes. The second error arises because of the inability to cross-verify lists of eligible persons … entire Act was bound to fail as there is no provision for severing clauses in Indian Constitution, unlike Section 55 of the Australian Constitution. Insofar as justiciability of the Speaker’s decision is concerned, following judgments were referred to: