Business Law and Corporate Law

Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares (“CCPS”) are frequently used by companies to raise capital. Whether a mere accounting reclassification of CCPS from borrowings to share capital and securities premium as mandated under Indian Accounting Standards (‘Ind-AS’)— without receipt of any fresh consideration—can trigger taxation under section 56(2)(viib) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”)?

The updates examine the Supreme Court’s approach to environmental restrictions in the Taj Trapezium Zone, the continued responsibility of developers to honour contractual possession commitments despite regulatory extensions, the availability of specific performance where contracts provide for a refund, and the evolving insolvency jurisprudence strengthening protections available to homebuyers.

A comprehensive legal analysis of intellectual property ownership over moulds, tooling, CAD technical drawings, and product modifications in cross-border outsourced manufacturing. Covers supplier retention risks, unauthorised third-shift runs, ASEAN IP protection strategies for Indian OEMs, and a model supply-contract IP schedule.

India's investment landscape is evolving as capital markets deepen and investors shift their focus from pure growth to governance, founder quality, and comprehensive due diligence. Drawing on insights from a recent seminar hosted by Withers KhattarWong and Khaitan Legal Associates, this analysis explores how investors are navigating opportunities in India's maturing market while managing founder dynamics, compliance challenges, and exit strategies.

India’s startup definition has long been tied to two basic limits: the age of the business and its annual turnover. The test was easy to apply, but it did not always reflect the reality of ventures whose growth does not follow a conventional timeline. Deep tech businesses may spend years on scientific research, product testing and technology development before earning meaningful revenue. Cooperative enterprises may also build innovative and scalable solutions, even though their ownership structure differs from that of a company or an LLP. As India’s startup ecosystem became more diverse, the earlier framework began to leave some genuine innovators outside its scope.

Compulsorily Convertible Preference Shares (CCPS) remain one of the most widely used instruments for venture capital and private equity investments in Indian companies. Their appeal lies in the ability to combine equity classification with negotiated economic and governance protections. But CCPS are not governed by a single, standalone statutory framework. Their legal treatment is instead shaped by the Companies Act, FEMA and foreign investment rules, tax law, and, where applicable, SEBI regulations.

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) is governed by the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code (Code) in India, wherein the preamble explicitly notes that the code provides for re-organisation and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, partnership firms and individuals in a time bound manner for maximisation of value of assets1. From a practical standpoint, CIRP’s fundamental purpose is to facilitate the corporate debtor’s emergence from insolvency while optimizing asset value and maintaining balance among creditors’ interests.

An analysis of why formal entry in a company’s register of members is not always decisive for maintaining oppression and mismanagement proceedings, with reference to the Companies Act 1956, the Companies Act 2013 and recent Supreme Court precedent.

In a recent decision in KKH Finvest Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ashiesh Shukla [2026 INSC 803], the Supreme Court of India ("Supreme Court"), held that a non-signatory shareholder could be treated as a "veritable party" to an arbitration agreement contained in a Memorandum of Settlement where his obligations under a separately executed Share Purchase Agreement formed an integral part of the underlying composite transaction and the surrounding circumstances demonstrated an intention to be bound by the settlement.

A company, in the eyes of law, is a separate legal person. But unlike an individual, it cannot think, speak or act on its own. Every corporate decision is ultimately taken by people—directors...

A modest regulatory penalty can sometimes carry a larger transaction lesson. The recent adjudication order involving Fyle Technologies Private Limited is a good example. The Registrar of Companies, Bengaluru, penalised the company and four of its directors for approving share transfers in physical form even though the transferors had not first dematerialised their holdings.

A common misconception holds that insolvency moratoriums protect everyone associated with a distressed company, but the Supreme Court's ruling in the Mantri Manyata Energia Project case clarifies that Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code protects only the corporate debtor itself. What happens when promoters, directors, personal guarantors, and landowners face separate proceedings while the company undergoes Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, and how do courts determine whose obligations