Subscription - Judgment Search Results

Gudimetla Narasimha Murthy and ors. Vs. Government of A.P., Revenue De ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2002(6)ALT344

ordergoda raghuram j 1 the 16 petitioners claim to have been granted pattas by the settlement officer peddapuram now at...

Bharat Beedi Works Limited Vs. Kunhambu K. and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2003]115CompCas676(Kar); ILR2002KAR2289; 2002(6)KarLJ133

..... costs are made easy paragraph 3 dr k bhakthavatsala j subscription to public provident fund subscription of any amount not less than rs 500 and not ..... the p p f scheme 1968 as amended earlier by increasing the subscription limit from time to time hence direction is issued to the respondents ..... the p p f scheme 1968 and increase the maximum limit of subscription in the p p f account as per the finance act .....

Raymond Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)86ITD791(Mum.)

..... this purpose that it had engaged the services of the managers under the subscription agreement the subscription arrangement contains detailed clauses as to the rights and liabilities of the assessee ..... activity might have merited acceptance had it not been for clause 4 of the subscription agreement which itself makes a distinction between management commission and underwriting commission this .....

Das Lagerwey Wind Turbines Vs. Cynosure Investments Private

Court: Company Law Board CLB

..... of the company when the petitioner derived its rights as a shareholder under the subscription agreement any dispute thereon should necessarily be referred to arbitration under the arbitration clause ..... the company petition the allegations made in the company petition are independent of the subscription agreement and therefore the application to refer the parties to arbitration cannot be entertained .....

Sebi Vs. Incap Financial Services Ltd.

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... dated september 30 1998 initiated investigations into the alleged manipulation in promoters contribution late subscription in public issue etc 3 it has been observed from the prospectus dated april ..... protection guidelines and terms of prospectus the company is under obligation to refund the subscription to the public unless underwriting obligations have been invoked 6 from the investigations it .....

Paresh M. Parekh, Yogesh B. Vs. the Chairman, Securities and

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... were surely the late applications and if these were excluded from the computation of subscription then the subscription to the public issue was hardly 43 and the issue would have failed 53 ..... investor protection guidelines and terms of prospectus the company is under obligation to refund the subscription to the public unless underwriting obligations have been invoked 42 from the investigations it was .....

G.K. Kabra Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad

Reported in: (2003)87ITD249(Hyd.)

..... identify a particular batch that particular letter letter are mentioned in the column where the subscription voucher cannot be identified with a particular batch it is mentioned that the date of ..... as such the quantity required by the customer is supplied against the loaning document namely subscription voucher 4 cylinders being the property of assessee assessee maintains all records as per statutory .....

Roopram Sharma Vs. the Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... dishonoured the promoters contribution was not actually received in the company s public issue minimum subscription was not received that five share applications for the amount of rs 156 lacs were ..... lakhs was brought from darshan investments as promoters contribution the stock invest was encashed for subscription purpose and then returned back the share certificates were not sent to the person and .....

Sebi Vs. Gold Multifab Ltd.

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... to its associates investigations revealed that issue was not getting the required minimum subscription and this requirement was shown to have been met through financing arrangement this ..... that registrar abetted promoters of gml in arranging finance for circumventing requirement of minimum subscription the applications were arranged with the understanding that shares once allotted and listed .....

Sebi Vs. Saket Extrusions Ltd.

Court: SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... investor protection guidelines and terms of prospectus the company is under obligation to refund the subscription to the public unless underwriting obligations have been invoked 5 from the investigations it ..... for making applications thus aiding and abetting the promoters to show attainment of minimum subscription and to corner shares and once allotment process is over receive back the stock .....