Trendsutra Client Services Private Limited Vs Registrar Of Companies Pune

Sr.

No.

Para

(IV)",RD Report/Observation 21st December 2021,Response of the Petitioner Companies,"Supplementary Report    dated

21st     January 2022

(Comments of

the    Regional Director)

a),"In addition to compliance of

AS-14   (IND   AS-103)   the","As    far    as    observations

made in paragraph II(a) of","The           reply

submitted     by

,"Transferee   Company   shall pass such accountingÂ

entries which    are    necessary    in connectionÂ

with the scheme to     comply     with    Â

other applicable             Accounting

Standards such as AS-5(IND

AS-8) etc.","the   Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies undertake  that  they  shall

pass  necessary  accounting entries  in  connection  with

the Scheme as per AS -14

(IND  AS-103)  as  well  as comply        Â

with         other applicable           Accounting Standards  Â

such   as   AS-5 (IND  AS  -8)  etc.,  to  the

extent applicable.","the Applicant / Petitioner Companies

appears  to  be satisfactory

b),"As  per  Definitions  Clause- 1(1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6),Â

Clause-

1(1.14) & Clause-1(1.19, 1.20

&1.21) of the Scheme.

1.3  ""Appointed  Date""  shall mean the AppointedÂ

Date 1

or   Appointed   Date   2   or

Appointed     Date     3,     as applicable.

1.4 ""Appointed Date 1"" shall mean Effective Date.

1.5 ""Appointed Date 2"" shall

mean Effective Date +1(one)

Business Day.

1.6 ""Appointed Date 3"" shall mean Effective Date +2(Two)

Business Day

1.14 ""Effective Date"" means the    last   Â

date    on    which

sanctions/approvals/consents

and  conditions  specified  in Clause No. 34 of this Scheme

have been obtained/satisfied Reference in this scheme to

the   date   “of   coming   into effect  Â

of   this   schemeâ€​   or

“effectiveness of this schemeâ€​

shall mean the effective date.

1.19 ""Record Date 1"" means such date fixed by theÂ

Board of  the  Transferee  Company for      Â

the       purpose       of determining theÂ

shareholders

of the Transferor Company 1

to   whom    shares    of    the TransfereeÂ

Company shall be allotted        Â

pursuant         to amalgamation    under   Â

this Scheme.

1.20 ""Record Date 2"" means

such date fixed by the Board of  the  Transferee Â

Company for       the      Â

purpose       of

determining the shareholders

of the Transferor Company 2.

1.21 ""Record Date 3"" means such date fixed by theÂ

Board of  the  Transferee  Company for      Â

the       purpose       of determining theÂ

shareholders of the Transferor Company 3

to   whom    shares    of    the TransfereeÂ

Company shall be allotted        Â

pursuant         to amalgamation    under   Â

this Scheme.

In this regard it is submitted

that  Section  232(6)  of  the

Companies Act, 2013 states that  the  scheme Â

under  this section shall clearly indicate an appointed date from

which it shall be effective, and the scheme shall be deemed to

be

effective from such date and

not at a date subsequent to the appointed date. However, this

aspect may be decided by the Hon’ble Tribunal taking

into   account   its   inherent

powers.

Further, the Petitioners may be asked to comply withÂ

the requirements   and    clarified

vide  circular  no.  F.     No.

7/12/2019/CL-1Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â dated 21.08.2019Â Â Â

issued   by   the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.","As far as observations made in  paragraph  II(b)  of  the Report of Regional

Director is concerned, the Petitioner Companies  states  that  in

accordance      to      Section

232(6)  of  the  Companies

Act,    2013,    the    Scheme clearly indicates/ specifies-

In clause 1.3 that Appointed Date means, for purpose of the    Scheme,   Â

Appointed

Date 1, Appointed Date 2

or  Appointed  Date  3,  as applicable    which    is    in

compliance   with   Section 232(6)  of  the  Companies Act, 2013,Â

and the Scheme shall take effect from such

date.

In clause 1.4 that Appointed Date     shall     mean     the Effective

date.

In   clause   1.5   Appointed Date   2   shall   mean   the

Effective   Date   +   1(One) Business Day.

In   clause   1.6   Appointed Date   3   shall   mean   the

Effective  Date  +  2  (Two) Business Day

In   clause   1.14    Effective Date means the last date on which  Â

sanctions/approvals or   order   as   specified   in

Clause   No.   34   of   this

Scheme have been obtained. Reference in this Scheme to the  date  of  ‘coming Â

into

effect  of  this  Scheme’  or

‘effectiveness        of        this Scheme’   shall  Â

mean   the Effective Date

In clause 1.19 Record Date 1 means such date fixed by the  Board Â

of  Directors  of

Transferee Company for the purpose of determining the shareholders  of  Transferor

Company  1  to  whom  the shares   of   the   Transferee

Company shall be allotted

pursuant  to  amalgamation

under this Scheme.

In clause 1.20 Record Date 2 means such date fixed by the  Board Â

of  Directors  of Transferee Company for the

purpose of determining the

shareholders  of  Transferor Company 2.

In clause 1.21 Record Date 3 means such date fixed by the  Board Â

of  Directors  of

Transferee Company for the purpose of determining the shareholders  of  Transferor

Company  3  to  whom  the

shares   of   the   Transferee Company shall be allotted pursuant Â

to  amalgamation under this Scheme.

The  Petitioner  Companies further undertake that they

have   complied   with   the

requirements as applicable, of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs    General   Â

Circular No. F. No. 7/12/2019/CL-

I dated August 21, 2019, by mentioning  the  Appointed

Date in the Scheme and the

same is also complying with the  provisions  of  Section 232(6)  of  the Â

Companies

Act, 2013.","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional Director    Â

and

reply submitted

byÂ

                the

Petitioner Company

which  appears satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may

pass appropriate orders/orders as deemÂ

fit on merit.

c),"The  Hon'ble  Tribunal  may

kindly  seek  the  undertaking

that this Scheme is approved by the requisite majority of

members and creditors as per Section 230(6) of the Act in

meetings duly held in terms of Section 230(1) read with

subsection   (3)   to   (5)   of

Section 230 of the Act and the Minutes thereof areÂ

duly placed before the Tribunal.","As far as observation made

paragraph II(c) the Report

of   Regional   Director   is concerned,   the   Petitioner

Companies  state  that  the meetings    of    the    Equity

Shareholders  and  Secured Creditors  of the Petitioner

Companies have dispensed

with by the Order Tribunal dated 17th September 2021 in   view  Â

of   the   consent affidavits received from all the Equity Shareholders and

Secured Creditors of all the Petitioner    Companies    in this regard.

Further the present Scheme is an arrangement between the   Petitioner  Â

Companies and      their      shareholders contemplated under section

230(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 and there is no compromise or

arrangement with Unsecured Creditors as no  sacrifice  is  called  for. The rights of

the Unsecured Creditors are not affected as all    Unsecured    Creditors would Â

be  paid  off  in  the ordinary course of business. In view of this, the meetings ofÂ

the Unsecured Creditors in the Petitioner Companies were  dispensed  with  vide

Order dated 17th September 2021","The           reply

submitted     by

the Applicant / Petitioner Companies

appears  to  be satisfactory

d),"Hon’ble  NCLT  may  kindly direct the Petitioners to file

an affidavit to the extent that the

Scheme    enclosed    to    the

Company   Application   and the Company Petition are one

&  same  and  there  are  no discrepancy/  Â

any   change/ changes     are    Â

made,     for changes  if  any,  liberty  be

given to Central Government

to file further  report  if any

required.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II(d) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional

Director  is  concerned  the

Petitioner            Companies undertake that the Scheme enclosed Â

to  the  Company Scheme Application & the Company  Scheme  Petition is

one and the same there is

no discrepancy/ no changes

between the two.","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner

Companies appears  to  be

satisfactory

e),"The       Petitioners       under provisions ofÂ

Section 230 (5) of the Companies Act, 2013

have   to   serve   notices   to

concerned  authorities  which are likely to be affectedÂ

by Amalgamation.  Further,  the approval  of  the Â

Scheme  by this  Hon’ble  Tribunal  may notÂ

deter such authorities to

deal with any of the issues

arising after giving effect to the scheme. The decisionÂ

of such Authorities is binding on the Petitioner Company(s).","As far as the observation made in paragraph II(e) of the   Report  Â

of   Regional

Director  is  concerned  the

Petitioner            Companies undertake     that,     notices

under Section 230(5) of the Companies Act, 2013 have been duly servedÂ

upon the following authorities;

The      Regional      director

(western Region), Ministry of       Corporate       Affairs, Mumbai;

Registrar    of    Companies, Maharashtra, Mumbai;

The          Income          Tax

Authorities   within   whose

jurisdiction   the   Applicant Companies are assessed to tax i.e., for FirstÂ

Applicant Company,     Income     Tax Authority      at     Â

14(1)(2), Mumbai,     having     PAN AADCT9374Q, for Second

Applicant             Company, Income  Tax  Authority  at

Circle    14(1)(2),    Mumbai

having                            PAN

AADCT9282F.

GST     Authority     within whose      jurisdiction      the

respective              Applicant Companies are assessed to goodsÂ

and service tax i.e., for         First         Applicant

Company,      Goods      and Service  Tax  Authority  at

Zone                                     Â

â€

MUMBAI_SOUTH_EAST,

Division â€" MUMBAI-LTU- 4, Charge  MUMBAI-LTU-

548        having        GSTIN 27AADCT9374Q1ZC,    for

Second                   Applicant Company,     Â

Goods      and Service  Tax  Authority  at MUMBAI-LTU-518,

Division â€" Mulund, Charge

â€"       Vikroli_701       having GSTIN 27AADCT9282F1Z0.

The Reserve Bank of India and;

The  Official  Liquidator  in case    of    First    Applicant

Company,     pursuant     to section     230(5)    Â

of     the Companies  Act,  2013  and rule  8  of  the Â

Companies (Compromises, Arrangements                 and

Amalgamations)Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Rules, 2016

The  Petitioner  Companies understand and confirm that the approval of theÂ

Scheme by  the  Tribunal  may  not deter any of the authorities from

dealing with any of the issues  as  may  arise  after

giving effect to the Scheme.","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner

Companies appears  to  be

satisfactory

f),"Petitioner Company have to undertake   to  Â

comply   with section             232(3)

(i)       of Companies Act, 2013, where the  Â

transferor   company   is dissolved, the fee, if any, paid by the

transferor company on

its authorized capital shall be

set-off     against     any     fees

payable   by   the   transferee company  on Â

its  authorised

capital   subsequent   to   the

amalgamation and therefore, petitioners to affirm that they complyÂ

the provisions of the section.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II(f) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned  the

Petitioner            Companies undertake  to  comply  with

section         232(3)(i)         of

Companies     Act,      2013,

where upon the dissolution of          the         Â

Transferor Companies, the fee, if any,

paid    by    the    Transferor

Companies        on        their authorised  capital  shall  be

set-off    against    any    fees payable  by  the  Transferee

Company on its authorised capital  subsequent  to  the

amalgamation,                 the

Petitioner            Companies hereby undertake that they

shall    comply    with    the provisions    of    the   Â

said

section.

As  far  as  the  observation

made in paragraph II(g) of the   Report   of   Regional Director Â

is  concerned  the Petitioner            Companies undertake Â

that  they  shall ensure compliance of all the

provisions  of  the  Income

Tax   Act,   1961   including provisions of Section 2(1B) of  the Â

Income  Tax  Act, 1961, further Clause 16 of the  Scheme  mentions Â

the following:

“The    Amalgamation    as

contemplated       in       this Scheme         Â

would          be completed in a manner so as to     Â

comply      with      the conditions      relating      to

‘amalgamation’ as specified under section 2(1B) of the Income Tax Act,Â

1961. If any terms or provisions of the  Scheme  are  found  or

interpreted           to           be

inconsistent       with       the provisions    of   Â

the    said section  at  the  later  date including resulting from an

amendment  of  law  or  for any         Â

other          reason whatsoever      up     to     the

Effective         Date,         the provisions    of   Â

the    said section of the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall prevail and

the        Scheme        shall be modified     Â

by      obtaining necessary   directions   from the  Appropriate Â","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner Companies appears   to  be

satisfactory

The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner Companies appears  to  be

satisfactory

,,"Authority to the  extent  necessary to comply with Section 2(1B) of Â

the  Income  Tax  Act, 1961      or      re-enactment thereof.â€​",

g),"The Petitioner Company may

be     directed     to     submit

undertaking         that         the

petitioner     company     shall ensure complianceÂ

of all the provisions of the Income Tax Act,        Â

1961Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â including

provisions of Section 2(1B) of

the Income Tax Act.",,

h),"As per Part III Clause 14(14.1 to   14.3)   of   the  Â

Scheme (Consolidation of Authorised

Capital  and  amendment  to

the memorandum and article of     Â

Association      of      the Transferee Company); In

this regard it is submitted that the fee payable by the transferee

company      shall      be      in

accordance with the provision

of  Section  13,  Section  14, Section   Â

61    and    Section 232(3)(i)  of  the Â

companies Act, 2013 further if any stamp duty   is Â

payable   the   same should be paid in accordance

with  applicable  laws  of   the

state.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II(h) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional

Director  is  concerned  the

Petitioner            Companies undertake  to  comply  with

provisions   of   section   13, section 14, section 61 and

section         232(3)(i)         of Companies  Act, Â

2013Â Â and

in case of any stamp duty

fee payable the same shall be paid in accordance with applicable laws of the

State;","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner

Companies appears  to  be

satisfactory

i),"As per Part-V clause 21(21.1) of  the  Scheme  (Accounting

Treatment), Upon the scheme became   effective  Â

from   the

Appointed date 1, Appointed

date 2 and Appointed date 3,

respectively,                        Â

the Amalgamation of Transferor Company with the Transferee

Company shall be accounted as per below method:

The    Transferee    Company

shall      account      for      the

amalgamation  of  Transferor Companies as per “Pooling of

Interestâ€​ Method as stated in

Appendix     C     of     Indian

Accounting  Standard  (IND AS)          Â

103           Business Combination    Â

and     Indian Accounting Standards.

In this regard it is stated that

Indian  accounting  standard

(IND     AS)103-      prescribe application  Â

of   pooling   of interest  method  to  account forÂ

common control business combination.     Under    Â

this method      any      difference,

whether positive or negative,

shall    be   adjusted    against

capital          reserves          (or

“Amalgamation   Adjustment Deficit   Accountâ€​  Â

in   some cases). In view of the above it is     Â

submitted      that      the

difference    so    credited    to

“Capital Reserve arising out of Amalgamationâ€​ shall not

be available for distribution of dividend  and  other  similar

purposes.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (i) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies

submit that

The   Transferee   Company shall     account     for     the

amalgamation       of       the Transferor   Companies   on

the   basis   of   'Pooling   of

Interest' method as stated in

Indian Accounting Standard

103            â€"            Business Combination.

Further,     the     Petitioner

Companies    confirm    and undertake, that the amount if  any Â

credited  to  Capital Reserves on Amalgamation shall  not  be Â

available  for distribution.","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner

Companies

appears  to  be satisfactory

j),"As per part-v-clause 21(21.2) of the scheme (Reduction in

Security Premium Account).

Further,  deficit  as  per  sub-

clause(f)    of    clause    21.1, debited  Â

to   “Amalgamation adjustment  deficit  accountâ€​

shall    be   adjusted    against Security  Â

Premium  Account appearing  in  the  books  of

Transferee   Company   upon

the scheme become effective with  effect  from Â

Appointed Date 3.

Further, the said reduction is Security  Premium Â

Account, pursuant  to  sub  clause  (a)

above,  shall  be  effected  as

integral part of this scheme with provision of sectionÂ

230 to 232 read with section 52 and section 66 ofÂ

Companies Act,            Â

2013.             The

approval/consent                 of

shareholder     of     transferee

company for the purpose of effecting above reduction in

Security   Premium  Account and   no  Â

further   resolution under section 52 and 66 of

the    Act    and    any    other

applicable  provision  of  the Act, would be requested to be

passed       separately.       The

reduction        in        Security

Premium        Account        as aforesaidÂ

would not involve either a diminution in liability in respect to the unpaid

share capital, if any, or payment of paid up share capital. In this

regard  it  is  submitted  that

petitioner company shall also comply with the provision of

section 52 read with 66 and other  relevant Â

provision  of

the Companies Act, 2013.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (j) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional

Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies submit and hereby confirm that thatÂ

the adjustment of the                 Amalgamation AdjustmentÂ

Deficit account against       the       Securities

Premium   Account   would

not     involve     either     a diminution  in  liability  in

respect   of   unpaid   share capital, if any, nor will be treated asÂ

payment of paid- up        capital.        Further,

pursuant to the approval of

the  Tribunal  the  company shall be in compliance with section 55 of the

Companies Act, 2013 and no separate compliance     is     required.

Since    the    reduction    in

Securities                Premium

Account  is  being  done  as integral part of scheme no

separate      provisions      of section 66 of the Companies Act 2013Â

are required to be

complied     with     as     per

explanation to Section 230 of the Companies Act 2013. The    relevant  Â

extract    of

Section      230      of      the

Companies   Act,   2013   is reproduced herein below;

“Explanation:      For      the removal   of  doubts,   it Â

is hereby   declared   that   the provisions   of   section   66

shall   not   apply   to   the

reduction      of      securities premium      Â

account       in pursuance  of  the  order  of the  Â

Tribunal   under   this

sectionâ€​","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the

Regional

Director     and reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on

merit.

k),"As    per    part-VII-    clause

25(25.1   to   25.10)   of   the scheme Â

(Reduction  in  Face Value and  Consolidation of

such  series  A  and  series  B Non-cumulative

compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares

of the transferee Company).

In this regard it is submitted that petitioner companyÂ

may be directed to place on record of consents/approval of series

A     and     series     B     non-

cumulative         compulsorily

convertible preference shares

as this clause of the scheme proposes  selective Â

reduction in nature. Further petitioner

company is also be directed

to submit that as the current Reduction in Share Capital is

selective  in  determent  and therefore  why  it Â

is  not  to unjust and unfair to the rest

of         Shareholders/member

holding equity  share  capital

of the company","As  far  as  the  observation

made in paragraph II (k) of the   Report   of   Regional Director Â

is  concerned,  the Petitioner companies hereby submit and confirm that it

has       obtained       written

consent  affidavit  from  the

Series A and Series B Non- Cumulative    Compulsorily

Convertible          Preference Shareholders and the same was    Â

annexed     to     the Company                 Â

Scheme

Application. Further, since

there  is  no  consideration being paid to the Preference

Shareholders                 upon

reduction        of        capital

accordingly,   there   is   no outflow  of  cash  from  the

Transferee  Company,  thus there is no question of being unjust or unfair to theÂ

rest of     the     shareholders     /

members of the Transferee

Company.","On the basis of

observation made   by   the

Regional Director     and reply

submitted

by               Â

 the

Petitioner

Company which  appears satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass

appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on merit.

l),"Since the transferor company

2   and   transferee   company have       Â

foreign/nonresident shareholders, it is subject to the Compliance of

Section 55

of the companies Act, 2013 the   FEMA  Â

regulation/RBI guidelines  by  the  transferee company.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (l) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies

submit that it shall comply with  the  provision  section 55 ofÂ

Companies Act, 2013 along-with      the      FEMA

Regulation/Guidelines     as applicable   upon   issue   of

shares  pursuant  to  merger

by the Transferee Company.","The           reply

submitted     by the Applicant /

Petitioner

Companies

appears  to  be satisfactory

m),"Trendsutra  Cyprus  Limited (Transferor Company No. 1)

is          foreign          company

incorporated      in      Cyprus.

Further, the present registrar

office    of    above-mentioned

company is situated at Aspen Trust Group, Elia House, 77

Limassol      Avenue,      2121

Nicosia, Cyprus and does not

fall    within    the    Hon’ble

Tribunal.             Accordingly, similar approvals be

obtained by the above said Transferor Company in accordance

with the law of Cyprus.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (m) of the   Report  Â

of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies

submit that as mentioned in

the Clause 22 of the Scheme the   Transferor   Company has  obtained  the Â

approval

for       transfer       of       the

registration     office     from Cyprus    and    accordingly

obtained      approvals      in accordance with the laws of Cyprus.","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional

Director     and

reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on

merit.

n),"Since     the     company     is presentlyÂ

situated in Cyprus the  FEMA  Regulation  and prior Â

approval  of  the  RBI

hove  to  be  taken  on  place

before approval of scheme.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (n) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies

submits that the Transferor Company 1 being an entity incorporated Â

outside  India is    in    compliance    with Section     Â

234      of      the Companies Act, 2013 and is

in   compliance   with   the

conditions     specified     in Inbound Merger under the

Foreign                  Exchange Management (Cross Border

Merger)  Regulations  2018 and         accordingly         a

Certificate  of  Compliance

under  Rule  9  of  FEMA (Cross     Border     Merger)

Regulations is obtained by the     Directors     of     the

Petitioner  Company  dated 2nd  February 2021 and the same   is  Â

annexed   to   the Company                  Scheme

Application.   Further,   the proposed  merger  amounts to deemedÂ

approval of the Reserve    Bank    of    India under   Â

rule    9     of    the aforementioned regulations, thus   Â

no    separate     RBI approval       is       required.

Petitioner              Company confirms     that    Â

it     has submitted    a    notice    u/s 230(5) to RBI as directed by

the Tribunal, no objections have been raised by the RBI in relation to the Scheme.","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional

Director     and

reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on merit.

o),"Trendsutra  Cyprus  Limited (TCL) (Transferor Company

No. 1) stated that TCL is in the    process   Â

of    registered under the laws of Mauritius,

pursuant      to      shifting/re- domiciliation of the

registered

office of TCL from Cyprus to

Mauritius     and     will     be

therefore          known          as

Trendsutra               Mauritius

Limited.      The      transferor

company 1 will concurrently seek    approval   Â

from    the

Financial                     Services

Commission in Mauritius to operate   as   an  Â

Authorized Company         (as        Â

define

hereinafter).      In      Present

Composite       Scheme       of

Amalgamation                   and

Arrangement     (Merger    by

absorption),              petitioner

company                Trendsutra

Mauritius   Limited   is   not

transferor  company  in  this

scheme as it is not in present petition   since   it  Â

has   not transferred   their   registered

office     from     Cyprus     to Mauritius.Â

In this regard it is submitted that the petitioner

company shall also place on

record     full     facts     before

approval    of    the    scheme

regarding               shifting/re-

domiciliation   of   registered office    Â

from     Cyprus     to

Mauritius and also petitioner

company also undertake that petitioner    Â

company     shall comply  with  the  applicable lawÂ

of Mauritius or Hon’ble NCLT may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit and direct    petitioner    company

companies to place on record

full facts.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (o) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies submit that it has received the approval

for shifting/re-

domiciliation  of  registered

office    from    Cyprus    to Mauritius as mentioned in Clause 22Â

of  the  Scheme.

Further,                 Petitioner

Companies, hereby confirm and undertake that it shall comply    and   Â

obtain    the approval for the Scheme in Mauritius    in   Â

accordance with the applicable law of

Mauritius, pursuant to the

approval  received  by  this Tribunal.","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional Director    Â

and reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner

Company which  appears satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on merit.

p),"Trendsutra Cayman Holdings (Transferor Company No. 3)

is          foreign          company

incorporated     in     Cayman Island.  Further, Â

the  present registrar   office    of    above-

mentioned      company      is situated  at Â

2nd  Floor,  The Grand Pavilion Commercial Centre, 802Â

West Bay Road, PO     Box    10338,    Â

Grand Cayman KY1-1003, Cayman Islands   and  Â

does   not   fall within the Hon’ble Tribunal.

Accordingly,                 similar approvalsÂ

be obtained by the above       said      Â

Transferor Company in accordance with the law of Cayman Island.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (p) of the  Â

Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies hereby       Â

confirm        and undertake    that    it    shall

comply    and    obtain    the approval for the Scheme in Cayman in

accordance with applicable laws of Cayman Island      for     Â

Trendsutra Cayman                    Limited (Transferor Company

3).","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional Director    Â

and reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on merit.

q),"Since     the     company     is presentlyÂ

situated in Cayman

Island the FEMA Regulation

and prior approval of the RBI hove  to  be  taken  on Â

place before approval of scheme.","As  far  as  the  observation made in paragraph II (q) of

the   Report   of   Regional

Director  is  concerned,  the Petitioner            Companies

submits that the Transferor

Company 3 being an entity

incorporated  outside  India is    in    compliance    with

Section      234      of      the Companies Act, 2013 and is

in   compliance   with   the conditions     specified     in

Inbound Merger under the

Foreign                  Exchange Management (Cross Border

Merger)  Regulations  2018 and         accordingly         a

Certificate  of  Compliance under  Rule  9  of  FEMA

(Cross     Border     Merger)

Regulations is obtained by the     Directors     of     the

Petitioner  Company  dated 2nd  February 2021 and the same   is  Â

annexed   to   the Company                  Scheme

Application.   Further,   the

proposed  merger  amounts to deemed approval of the Reserve   Â

Bank    of    India under    rule    9     of    the

aforementioned regulations,

thus    no    separate     RBI

approval       is       required. Petitioner             Â

Company confirms     that     it     has submitted    a   Â

notice    u/s 230(5) to RBI as directed by the Tribunal, no objections have been raised

by the RBI

in relation to the Scheme.","On the basis of observation

made   by   the

Regional Director     and reply

submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass

appropriate orders/orders as deem fitÂ

on merit.

r),"As  regards  the  complaints

indicated at para 32 above,

under  the  head-  Status  of Complaint   Â

as    per    MCA portal-   Screen   shot,  Â

it   is submitted    that    both    the

petitioners   be   directed   to mention the currentÂ

position

regarding                complaints

redressed  by   the  company and  to  file Â

an  undertaking accordingly;     Further     the

complaint         relates         to

Accounting      Fraud,       the PetitionerÂ

Company to place

on        record        that       Â

no

unaccounted       money       is

involved    in    the    present scheme  Â

neither   scheme   is devised to circumvent the tax laws of the

countries.","As  far  as  the  observation

made in paragraph II (r) of

the   Report   of   Regional Director  is  concerned,  the

Petitioner            Companies hereby     submit    Â

that     a Complaint Form vide SRN no 100006014 was filed by

one of its creditor Anand L

Makhija  (A  J  Marketing), the Petitioner Companies in its   reply  Â

to   Registrar   of Companies     dated     05th

February         2019         has confirmed        Â

that         the

Complaint  was  completely

resolved and satisfied by the Transferor Company 2 i.e. Trendsutra  Client  Services

Private  Limited  and  that there are no further pending disputes, queries, claimsÂ

by

the   Creditor   against   the

Company. A letter from the Creditor was also obtained with respect to the same and is  Â

attached   herewith   as Annexure  C.  Further,  the

Petitioner            Companies submit   that   there   is  Â

no unaccounted  money  being involved   in   the   present schemeÂ

and the scheme is not  devised  to  circumvent

the tax laws of the countries","On the basis of

observation

made   by   the Regional

Director     and reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner

Company

which  appears satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders

as deem fit on merit.

s),"In    view    of    the    above

observation  raised  by  ROC Mumbai, mentioned atÂ

para 33 above Hon’ble NCLT may

pass                       Â

appropriate orders/orders as deem it and direct petitioner

companies to place   on   record   full   fact.

However,     as     regard     to

observation(a)  of  the  ROC, Mumbai    Â

report,     Inquiry against transferor company 2 and Â

complaint  are  pending regarding accounting fraud as per MCA

portal.","As  far  as  the  observation made  in  paragraph  II  (s) and Â

(t)  of  the  Report  of Regional       Director       is

concerned    the    Petitioner Companies hereby submits that there isÂ

no accounting fraud    on    part    of    the TransferorÂ

Company 2 i.e. Trendsutra  Client  Services Private Limited, the notice

issued   by   the   RoC   u/s 206(4)    pursuant    to   Â

the Complaint     filed     by     a Creditor   has Â

 been   duly resolved      and      satisfied.

Further,                Transferee Company  hereby  confirms

and  undertake  to  comply

with further information / inquiry if any required by the  RoC  and Â

shall  duly comply with the documents and information as required by   the  Â

RoC.       Further, sanction of the Scheme by this Tribunal will notÂ

deter the right of the authorities to undertake any inquiry or proceedings. InÂ

any event, the Transferee Company is the surviving entity and the proceedings,Â

if any, against the   Transferee   Company shall continue to  exist. In

this  regard,  the  Petitioner Companies   place   reliance on the judgement

passed by the Hon’ble  High Court of Bombay in case of Mirasu MarketingÂ

Limited vs. Fem Care      Pharma      Limited (Company PetitionÂ

No.350 of   2008   connected   with Company  Application  No.

108 of 2008) that held as follows,

“Needless to state that no

penal proceedings or action initiated        against        the

transferor     or     transferee company or their director or officers inÂ

default shall be prejudiced  in  any  manner merely  because  this Â

Court has sanctioned the scheme.â€​ Further,      the      National

Company   Law   Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in case of following has upheld

similar view;           Scheme           of

Arrangement           between Macrotech          Developers

Limited    and    Grandezza Supremous  Thane  Private

Limited        (CP        (CAA) 2852/MB.V/2019

connected with CA (CAA) 2201/MB.V/2019)              ;

Scheme    of    Arrangement between Mahalasa Acoustic Private Limited andÂ

Power Engineering    Spares    and Services     (India)     Private

Limited        and        Power Engineering (India) Private

Limited        (CP        (CAA) No.2921/MB.III/2019

connected with CA (CAA) No.1796/MB.III/2019).","On the basis of observation made  Â

by   the Regional Director    Â

and reply submitted

by                Â

the

Petitioner Company which  appears

satisfactory,

the       Hon’ble

Tribunal    may pass appropriate

orders/orders as deem fit on merit.

t),"It  is  seen  that  the  ministry

order         inquiry         under

u/s.206(4) of the companies Act,   2013   in  Â

respect   of Trendsutra    Client    Service

Private  Limited  (Transferor Company 2) on the basisÂ

of Accounting      Fraud.      The Inquiry report is

still pending. If        the       Â

scheme        of Amalgamation is considered, it isÂ

difficult to process the inquiry   and   examine  Â

the issue/basis   of   inquiry   and also toÂ

correspondence with other government authorities without   Â

the    existence    of transferor   company  Â

2   i.e., Trendsutra    Client    Service PrivateÂ

Limited. In view of above  Hon’ble  NCLT   may

not allow the present scheme and arrangement (MergerÂ

by absorption)    of    Trendsutra Client      Â

Service        Private

Limited                  (Transferor

Company 2) with Pepperfry Private  Limited  (Transferee

Company).",,"It is seen that the     Â

Ministry Ordered inquiry       Â

u/s 206(4)   of   the Companies

Act,   2013   in respect Â

of  the Trendsutra Client   Service

Private (Transferor Company 2) on

the    basis    of Accounting

Fraud.        The Inquiry

   report is still pending. If Â

the  scheme of amalgamation is

considered, it is   difficult   to

process        the

inquiry       and

examine      the issue /Â

basis of inquiry       and

also               Â

to

correspondence

with             the

Government authorities without existence of

the Transferor Company 2 i.e

Trendsutra Client Services Private

Limited.        In

view    of    the above Â

Hon’ble NCLT may not

allow           the

present scheme of amalgamation and

arrangement (merger        Â

by absorption)Â Â Â of Trendsutra

Client   Service Private Limited

(Transferor Company      2)

with  Pepperfry Private Limited

(Transferee Company)