Yash Shelters Limited And Anr vs Respondent
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No.300 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The impugned order rejecting a scheme of amalgamation under Companies Act provisions, without addressing the appellants' affidavits filed in compliance and the Income Tax Department's later no-objection letter, and without giving the appellants any opportunity to respond to the Regional Director's report, cannot stand; the Tribunal sets aside such an order and remands the matter so that the appellants may be heard on the ROC's objections, the RD report and the Income Tax Department's objections.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) No.300 of 2024 In the matter of: Yash Shelters Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants Vs. .... ...Respondent
Present: Appellant: Mr. Pavan Gopiwala, Ms. Anushree Kapadia and Ms. Ekta Kundu, Advocates Respondent:
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 26.9.2024 - This Appeal is against an impugned Order dated 30.7.2024
wherein the scheme of amalgamation in Company Petition - CP(CAA)
No.58(AHM)/2023 in CA (CAA) No./46(AHM)/2023 was rejected. It is the
grievance of the learned Counsel for the Appellant that though the ROC had filed
Reply to the Affidavits filed by the Appellant before the learned NCLT wherein it
was stated the Affidavit of the Appellant Company was not in compliance of
Sections 185, 73 to 76 and Section 138 of the Companies Act, 2013, but then
they had filed its Compliance Affidavit on 5th March, 2024 alongwith three more
Affidavits dated 24.4.2024, 11.5.2024 and 22.6.2024 (all Annexure A-15)
explaining their position but all such Affidavits were never addressed to in the
impugned Orders. Further, it is submitted though the impugned Order notes
about a letter dated 28th December, 2023 written by the learned Standing
Counsel for Income Tax Department stating inter alia the scheme is not Tax
Neutral and they had objected to the scheme, but later a letter was again issued
on 9th February, 2024 (Annexure A13) wherein the Income Tax Department had
given no objection to the Scheme, subject to certain compliances. 2
2. Further, it is submitted the matter was reserved for orders by the learned
NCLT on 27th June, 2024 but RD Report dated 10th July, 2024 was filed later
which Report also reiterated in the impugned Judgement stating interalia there
was no compliance to Sections 185, 73 to 76 and Section 138 of the Companies
Act, 2013. However, such RD Report was never supplied to the Appellants and
its response(s) were never obtained and had their response(s) been on record, it
is urged, the scheme ought to have been approved.
3. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Appellants, an
opportunity be given to the appellants to explain their position before the learned
NCLT qua the RD Report and to press its Affidavits dated 24.4.2024, 11.5.2024
and 22.6.2024 as also the letter dated 9th February, 2024, issued by the Income
Tax Department giving no objection to the scheme.
3. In view of the above, the impugned Order is set aside and we remand the
matter to the learned NCLT. Additional documents, if any, be filed before the
learned NCLT within two weeks and the Appellants be given an opportunity to
explain its position qua the objections raised by the ROC; the RD Report
dated10th July, 2024 and to issues raised by Income Tax Department.
The Appeal stands disposed of in terms of above. Pending applications, if
any, are also disposed of.
[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)
[Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical) rs/md
Company Appeal (AT) No.300 of 2024
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free