Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: form 3cd :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: TDS :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: cpt :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT RATES :: due date for vat payment :: VAT Audit :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India
 
 
« General »
 Retailers need to file single GST return every month
 Aadhaar is must for income tax returns if you have one; Here's how you can file it online
 Will it be a tax haven above the law?
 Your mutual fund investment tax efficient? Here are 3 steps to ensure utmost efficiency for your portfolio
 Finally a goods and services tax. But what lies ahead?
 Tax May Rise On Outbound M&As, Indian Mncs’ Investments
 Filing income tax return? Do remember to claim benefits on your reimbursements
 Banks will have a hard slog ahead to get GST-ready
 Clarification regarding applicability of Section 16 (1)(a) of the Companies Act. 2013 with reference to cases under corresponding provisions of Companies Act. 1956
 Introduce indemnity clauses with suppliers on tax compliance: Expert
 While filing tax in India, NRIs do not have to report overseas assets

SEBI's rejection of call and put options will hit these instruments hard
August, 20th 2011

The debate on the validity of call and put options is not a new one. Although this debate was dormant for some time, the securities market regulator's recent view on the issue has forced it back into news. Recently, Sebi, in its informal guidance in Vulcan Engineers matter, has reiterated the stand it took in the case of Vedanta-Cairn deal that put and call options are not valid and had directed the parties to drop the call and put option arrangement from the share acquisition agreement.

Sebi's view is that any pre-agreed buyback of shares through call and put options is not valid under the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956. This is a sudden move. These share options had always existed and Sebi had knowledge of them, but it never approached them the way it has started doing now.

Naturally, this has not been well accepted by the legal and industry circles. Itis viewed as a retrograde step good enough to wary the investors. This will now add more uncertainty to the already-unsettled issue of enforceability of put and call options.

In spite of Sebi's view, private companies can still breathe easy, although securities of unlisted public companies may fall in this trap. Courtesy for this goes to some judicial precedents where ithas been held that provisions of Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act are not applicable to private companies but are applicable to unlisted securities of public companies. Nonetheless, it has opened the debate on the enforceability ofcall and put options.

Examining this issue from the Companies Act, 1956, perspective, there is a strong argument that these options are not really a restriction imposed by one shareholder on the other on transfer of shares. In fact, these options are mere private arrangements between two shareholders agreeing to buy or sell shares from each other, generally at a pre-determined price, on the happening of certain events.

Therefore, these options should not be treated as, and equated to, restriction on transfer of shares. The rule that an owner of a property is freely allowed to buy or sell his property should also apply with no exception to the buying or selling of shares as long as all other compliances of law are followed. Notably, the Companies Act does not prohibit and restrict shareholders from agreeing to call and put options.

Let us assume that these options are considered as restriction on transferability of shares. Even then, in a private limited company, these can still be enforced against the shareholders inter se and the company, provided they are incorporated in the articles of association (incorporation in articles is required because of the Supreme Court judgment in Rangaraj's case). The reason that these options can be enforced in a private limited company is that the Companies Act permits providing restriction on transferability of shares in a private limited company. However, the position is slightly different in the case of a public company.

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Bath SEO Company Birmingham SEO Company Bradford SEO Company Brighton and Hove SEO Company Bristol SEO Company Cambridge SEO Company Canterbury SEO Company Carlisle SEO Company Chester SEO Company Chichester SEO Company Coventry SEO Compan

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions