Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Companies Law

        2005 (11) TMI 256 - HC - Companies Law

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Undisputed debt can support winding up when statutory notice is ignored and no genuine defence or statutory bar is shown. An undisputed debt, supported by work orders, certified bills, tax deductions at source, non-payment within the stipulated time and silence after ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Undisputed debt can support winding up when statutory notice is ignored and no genuine defence or statutory bar is shown.

                          An undisputed debt, supported by work orders, certified bills, tax deductions at source, non-payment within the stipulated time and silence after statutory notice, was treated as sufficient evidence of liability for winding up. The court held that the petition was not barred by section 10 of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, because no inconsistency with the Companies Act, 1956 was shown. A prior money-recovery decree under that Act did not create res judicata, and the existence of another remedy under section 443(2) did not defeat winding up where the debt remained unpaid and no substantial defence was raised.




                          Issues: (i) whether the petitioner had established a determined, ascertained, definite and undisputed debt warranting winding up of the respondent company; (ii) whether the winding up petition was barred by section 10 of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993; and (iii) whether the prior decree obtained under that Act barred the petition by res judicata or by reason of availability of an alternative remedy under section 443(2) of the Companies Act, 1956.

                          Issue (i): Whether the petitioner had established a determined, ascertained, definite and undisputed debt warranting winding up of the respondent company.

                          Analysis: The work order, certified bills, tax deductions at source, failure to pay within the stipulated time, and non-response to the statutory notice together constituted strong evidence of an admitted liability. The absence of any objection from the respondent company or other interested persons further supported the conclusion that the amount claimed remained unpaid and was not genuinely disputed. In winding up proceedings, the relevant enquiry is whether the company is unable to pay its debts, not whether the creditor is merely pursuing recovery of money.

                          Conclusion: The debt was held to be determined, definite and undisputed, and the petitioner succeeded on this issue.

                          Issue (ii): Whether the winding up petition was barred by section 10 of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993.

                          Analysis: The overriding clause in section 10 operates only where there is inconsistency between the Act and another law. The Act was treated as a beneficial measure providing relief for delayed payments to small industrial undertakings, but it did not regulate or exclude the jurisdiction of the company court to wind up a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. No inconsistency between the two enactments was shown.

                          Conclusion: The petition was not barred by section 10, and the objection was rejected.

                          Issue (iii): Whether the prior decree obtained under the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 barred the petition by res judicata or by reason of availability of an alternative remedy under section 443(2) of the Companies Act, 1956.

                          Analysis: The proceeding before the Facilitation Council was for recovery of money, whereas the company petition sought winding up on the ground of inability to pay debts. The two proceedings were therefore not on the same issue, and res judicata did not apply. The existence of another remedy and a decree in the creditor's favour did not, by itself, make it unreasonable to order winding up when the debt remained unpaid and the company offered no substantial defence.

                          Conclusion: The petition was maintainable, and neither res judicata nor section 443(2) defeated the winding up prayer.

                          Final Conclusion: The court found that the respondent company had failed to discharge an undisputed debt and that no statutory or procedural objection prevented winding up.

                          Ratio Decidendi: Where a company owes an undisputed debt and fails to pay despite statutory notice, the company court may order winding up unless a genuine statutory bar or a substantial defence making winding up unreasonable is shown; a money-recovery decree under another enactment does not bar such proceedings.


                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found