Punjabdistilling Industries Ltd v. Commissioner Ofincome-Tax, Punjab, 1965 (35) Comp.cases 541; Wherein
High Court
02 Mar 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Punjabdistilling Industries Ltd v. Commissioner Ofincome-Tax, Punjab, 1965 (35) Comp.cases 541; Wherein
Date of order
02 Mar 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Punjabdistilling Industries Ltd v. Commissioner Ofincome-Tax, Punjab, 1965 (35) Comp.cases 541; Wherein, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY PETITION NO. 579 OF 2006 WITHCOMPANY APPLICATION NO. 745 OF 2006
COMPANY PETITION NO. 579 OF 2006
WITH
COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 745 OF 2006
In the matter of Scheme of Arrangement
between Elof Hansson (India) Private
Limited and its equity and its equity
shareholders.
Elof Hansson (India) Private
Limited, Mumbai. ... Petitioner.
Gaurav Joshi i/b. Prem J. Ranga
for the petitioner.
C.J.Joy with Ms.Madhuri Gaikwad i/b.
Pankaj Kapoor for the Regional Director.
CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J.
CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J.
DATED: 2nd March 2007.
DATED: 2nd March 2007.
P.C.:
P.C.:
. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties.
. Perused petition and the scheme of
arrangement.
2. The Regional Director, Western Region,
Ministry of Company Affairs has filed affidavit to
oppose the Scheme of Arrangement between M/s.Elof
Hanson (India) Private Limited and its equity
shareholders. He has raised three objections to the
(i) that there is no specific provision in the
Companies Act, 1956 to pay back an amount of
shares out of balance outstanding at the
credit of Reserves and Surplus Account of the
Company. The petitioner company is seeking
sanction of this Court under section 391 to
394 of the Companies Act which are not
applicable to the instant petition.
(ii) that the petitioner company may be
directed to file form No.23 with the Registrar
of Companies, Mumbai in respect of special
resolution passed on 18th August, 2006; and
(iii) that No Objection Certificates from
unsecured creditors are not produced.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the Regional
Director submits that there is no provision under the
Companies Act, 1956 to pay back the amount of share
out of balance outstanding at the credit of Reserves
and Surplus Account of the Company. He, therefore,
submits that the provisions of sections 391 to 394 of
the Companies Act shall not be applicable as such the
Scheme of Arrangement cannot be sanctioned. He
further submits that the petitioner be directed to
file Form No.23 with the Registrar of Companies,
Mumbai under section 101 of the Companies Act in
respect of special resolution passed on 18th August,
2006 and also No Objection Certificates from the
unsecured creditors.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner-
Company submits that for exercising right of bye back,
the Company can utilise its accumulated profit to pay
- 3 -
back to the shareholders the whole or part of the
paid-up amount of shares. He placed reliance on the
PunjabDistilling Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner ofIncome-Tax, Punjab, 1965 (35) Comp.Cases 541; wherein
judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Punjab
Distilling Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of
Income-Tax, Punjab
the Apex Court observed as under:
"..... Accumulated profits of a company may
be utilised in the following 3 ways: (I) for
increasing the capital stock; (2) for
distributing the same among the shareholders
by way of dividends; and (3) for reducing the
capital. Ordinarily, a company reduces the
capital when there is loss or depreciation of
assets; in that event there is no question of
distribution of profits to the shareholders
but the shares are only devaluated. But a
company may, on the pretext of reducing its
capital, utilise its accumulated profits to
pay back to the shareholders the whole or part
of the paid up amounts on the shares. A
shareholder though in form gets back the whole
or a part of the capital contributed by him,
in effect he gets a share of the accumulated
profits which, if a straightforward course was
be utilised in the following 3 ways: (I) for
increasing the capital stock; (2) for
distributing the same among the shareholders
by way of dividends; and (3) for reducing the
capital. Ordinarily, a company reduces the
capital when there is loss or depreciation of
assets; in that event there is no question of
distribution of profits to the shareholders
but the shares are only devaluated. But a
company may, on the pretext of reducing its
capital, utilise its accumulated profits to
pay back to the shareholders the whole or part
of the paid up amounts on the shares. A
shareholder though in form gets back the whole
or a part of the capital contributed by him,
in effect he gets a share of the accumulated
profits which, if a straightforward course was
followed, he should have received as dividend.
This is a division of profits under the guise
of division of capital; a distribution of
profits under the colour of reduction of
capital....."
(Emphasis supplied)
In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme
Court, the first objection raised by learned counsel
for the Regional Director has no substance.
- 4 -
5. So far as the second objection is concerned,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Company will have no objection to file Form No.23 with
the Registrar of Companies. He undertakes on behalf
of the Company to file the said form within two weeks
from today. The oral undertaking given by learned
counsel for the petitioner is accepted and taken on
record. However, petitioner- Company is directed to
file affidavit of undertaking to comply with the
second objection raised by the Regional Director
referred to hereinabove.
6. So far as No Objection to the arrangement from
the unsecured creditors is concerned, Mr.Marcellino
Silveira has filed affidavit on behalf of the Company
and produced some consent and no objection letters
from the unsecured creditors, details of which are
furnished along with the said affidavit dated 27th
February, 2007; wherein the statement is made that
the petitioner- Company has 16 unsecured creditors,
whose liability on the Company is in the sum of
Rs.9,49,935.50. Consent of 2 unsecured creditors
consenting to the subject Scheme of Arrangement, whose
value in terms of Company’s liability is to the tune
of Rs.3,98,813/- have been filed on record. Consent
- 5 -
letters of one unsecured creditor having liability to
the extent of Rs.1,980/- and other amounting to
Rs.1,000/- consenting to the Scheme of Arrangement are
filed on record.
7. In respect of others, a statement is made that
they mostly pertain to the payments on account of
salary and other miscellaneous items. In that view of
the matter, considering filing of consent letters from
majority of the unsecured creditors, non-filing of the
consent letters of the remaining unsecured creditors
is of no consequence. The Scheme of Arrangement,
thus, deserves to be approved.
8. In the result, petition is made absolute in
terms of prayer clause (a) with no order as to costs.
(V.C.DAGA,
(V.C.DAGA,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,
J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.