CA Final Law Exam... Awesome

raam i think you have got Question 1c wrong,if the client gives in writing and adheres to the clauses then  ganesham is allowed to invest on their behalf.. section 15 of securities contract regulation act

also question 2 a is section 372A ..section 292 authorises the board to delegate the power to make loans and investment. however it must be ensured that it does not result in the contravention of section 372A

and finally political contibution is section 293A and not 293B.

has anyone uploaded todays law paper of ca final exams?

Costing Theory Analysis...

/forum/details.asp?mod_id=143221&offset=1

q.1.c  i might be  wrong  but  again  as  far as pracitcal  knowledge  i know  the  shares  traded  by  regulators  are  illegal  and  company  want  that  they  should deal  on  behalf of company  its even not allowed  so might be i m wrong 

q.2  a.  i dnt  agree with u  ,  its  the  company  suppose to take  loan  from the bank  not  suppose to invest  or  provide loans so  as  sec  372  A  speaks  out  for the  loan  to be  given  not  to be  taken 

the  aplicable  section  is  sec  292  where the  board  can  authorised  /delegate  the  power to md , now the  loan  amont  is  max  of  share capital + reserves ,it comes  450 lks  temperory  loan  are  out of the  preview  of  this section  so  the  company  can  get  rs.150 cr  more loan  without  taking  permission  from share holders  and  for  taking the loan  of  450  cr  in total  600  cr  company need to ask to share holders  in  gm  by  special  resolution 

yes  sec  applicable  is  293 a   , i got confused in exam  and  written  293  b   on the  presumtion that  

293  a  is  for the  contrbution  /donation  to  any  other person 

293  b  for  political  parties  that a  mistake i made 

q 2 a. sec 293 is applicable.sec 292 authorised the MD to Borrow,invest or loan.ans should be 100+300=400 less 150 (only secured loan)=250,so that for balance 350 cr consent of members r required.correct if m wrong.

its not so easy man....

but its exceeding 60% and 100% criteria u/s 372A, hence not allowed without prior approval at GM. first of all its a public ltd cos cause the name doe not mention pvt ltd as required, secondly section 292 provisions are over ridden by 372A,  the question is whether loan should be granted having regards to provisions of companies act.... hence when 372A itself is being breached the question of 292 does not arise, secondly for approval u/s 372A case to case approval is required and not a blanket approval, hence it can be safely assumed that no approval for this particular case has been taken.

My call would still be section 372A applicability.

hey frendz.... Mr Bhatt.. is PRI.....CONFIRMED

can someone download yesterdays law paper ca final?

all u r  saying  is  right  about  sec  372 a  ,  but answer me  the  question

1.  who  want  the  loan :-  company  , what  section  372  a  speaks  for  providing  loan  who  is  providing  loan  bank  , its  come  under  the  banking  regulation  act  ...so  the  bank  need to  evaluate  the  praposal  from  companies  act  point  of  u  

2.  sec  292  gives  md  a  delegation  to get loan 

3. sec  293 1  d   provide  for  the  loan  

so  from where  the  question  of  372  a  comes  ,  if  it  is  a  company  rather than  bank  which  is  providing  loan  then  we  need to  look for  sec  372 a  , if  its  bank  why  it  will  consider  for  sec  372 a  and  company  which  is  asking  loan  its  gets  it  under  sec  292  and  293  d 1  

why  u  guys  are  getting  confused  , first  make  the  assessment  who  want the  loan  and  and  who is  providing  the  loan  , regarding  whom  u need to assess  the  stiuation  and  second and  most  imp  is  which  provision  apply