NCLAT Dismisses Appeal Against Scheme of Amalgamation — No Immediate Prejudice Established. The Appellant's objections were anticipatory and did not warrant interference with the NCLT's order under Section 232 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: CHENNAI
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against the approval of a scheme of arrangement and amalgamation between M/s. Shasun Leasing and Finance Private Limited and M/s. Axxelent Pharma Science Private Limited. The Appellant, the Office of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, challenged the order of the NCLT dated 10.03.2026, claiming that their objections submitted on 23.08.2025 were not considered. The Appellant argued that the scheme aimed to transfer reserves without distributing them to shareholders, potentially avoiding dividend tax. The NCLT had sanctioned the scheme after considering objections and found it not detrimental to the interests of the companies involved. The Appellant's objections were deemed anticipatory, and the Tribunal noted that the scheme did not preclude the Income Tax Department from pursuing any tax liabilities. The Tribunal highlighted that the Appellant's interests were protected under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the lack of consideration of the objection did not render the order invalid, as no immediate prejudice was demonstrated. The decision emphasized that the Appellant retained options to protect their interests regarding tax liabilities (Paras 1-13).

Headnote

A) Company Law - Scheme of Amalgamation - Consideration of Objections - Companies Act, 2013, Section 232 - The Appellant contended that their objections regarding the scheme were not considered by the NCLT, which could vitiate the order. The Tribunal found that the objections were anticipatory and that the interests of the Appellant were safeguarded, thus upholding the NCLT's order. Held that the appeal was dismissed as no immediate prejudice was established (Paras 4-13).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the objections raised by the Appellant were adequately considered by the NCLT in approving the scheme of amalgamation.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal found no immediate prejudice caused by the NCLT's order. The Appellant's objections were deemed anticipatory, and their interests regarding tax liabilities were safeguarded.

Law Points

  • Scheme of arrangement
  • amalgamation
  • objections
  • Income Tax Act
  • 1961
  • Companies Act
  • 2013
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (06) 13

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No.55/2026

2026-06-08

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Jatindranath Swain

Mr. P. Rajkumar Jhabakh, Mr. PH Arvind Pandian, Mr. Abishek Raman, Mr. Ashwin Raman

THE OFFICE OF ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

AXXELENT PHARMA SCIENCE PRIVATE LIMITED

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the approval of a scheme of amalgamation.

Remedy Sought

The Appellant sought to challenge the NCLT's order approving the scheme.

Filing Reason

The Appellant claimed their objections were not considered by the NCLT.

Previous Decisions

The NCLT had sanctioned the scheme after considering objections from various parties.

Issues

Whether the NCLT adequately considered the Appellant's objections Whether the scheme of amalgamation violated any provisions of the Income Tax Act

Submissions/Arguments

The Appellant argued that their objections were not addressed, rendering the order invalid. The Respondent contended that the objections were anticipatory and that the Appellant's interests were protected.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the lack of consideration of anticipatory objections does not invalidate the NCLT's order, especially when the Appellant's interests are protected under the law.

Judgment Excerpts

The scheme, prima facie, is not detrimental to the interests of the members of the respective companies. The objections raised therein were rather anticipatory in nature. The order should not be construed as granting exemption from payment of stamp duty, taxes or any other charges.

Procedural History

The Appellant filed objections on 23.08.2025, which were not considered in the NCLT's order dated 10.03.2026, leading to the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 2013: Section 232
  • Income Tax Act, 1961:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Union of India's Appeal in Benami Property Case — Clarifies Prospective Effect of 2016 Amendment.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeals in Partition Suit, Remands for Mesne Profits Inquiry Under Order 20 Rule 18 CPC. The court upheld the District Judge's order setting aside the trial court's execution order and remanding for inquiry into mesne ...