2013 (2) TMI 830 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation.
2. Objection by the Income Tax Department regarding tax evasion.
3. Compliance with statutory requirements and public interest.

Summary:

1. Sanction of the Scheme of Amalgamation:
The petition u/s 391 and 394 of the Companies Act 1956 sought to sanction the Scheme of Amalgamation of Anu Trading Private Limited (transferor Company) with Shinano Retail Private Limited (transferee Company). The Court initially dispensed with the meeting of equity shareholders and unsecured creditors of the transferor Company. Notices were issued to relevant authorities, and the Scheme was published as per Company Court Rules. The Regional Director and Official Liquidator filed affidavits indicating no objections to the Scheme, provided certain conditions were met.

2. Objection by the Income Tax Department regarding tax evasion:
The Income Tax Department intervened, alleging that the transferor Company had not filed Income Tax Returns and that incriminating documents were found during a survey u/s 133A. They argued that the Scheme was designed to evade tax liability. However, the Court noted that tax planning within legal bounds is permissible. The Regional Director and Official Liquidator, after examining the objections, concluded that the Scheme was not framed solely to evade tax. The Court stated that objections related to tax evasion could be addressed in separate proceedings under the IT Act.

3. Compliance with statutory requirements and public interest:
The Court referred to the Supreme Court's guidelines in Miheer H. Mafatlal v. Mafatlal Industries Ltd., emphasizing that the Scheme must comply with statutory procedures, be backed by requisite majority votes, and not violate any laws or public policy. The Scheme was found to be part of a larger group restructuring involving eight companies. The Bombay High Court had already sanctioned the Scheme for the transferee Company, finding it fair and reasonable. The Court imposed conditions to ensure compliance with tax liabilities and public interest, including not disposing of books and papers without permission and continuing pending legal proceedings against the transferee Company.

Conclusion:
The Scheme of Amalgamation was approved with specific conditions to safeguard tax liabilities and public interest. The transferor Company was ordered to pay costs to the Official Liquidator and Regional Director, and the petitioner Company was dissolved without winding up.