https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97608 Issuing a recovery notice under section 46(5A) against a company in winding up, without first obtaining leave of the winding-up court, was treated as the commencement of a legal proceeding against property in the court's custody and therefore as contempt. The court held that the statutory bar protected the company in liquidation and that the notice interfered with that custody and authority. Withdrawal of the notice and an unconditional apology did not erase the contempt, although the apology was accepted as showing good faith and absence of intent to defy the court. The contemner was found guilty of technical contempt, but no punishment was imposed. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:26:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97608 Issuing a recovery notice under section 46(5A) against a company in winding up, without first obtaining leave of the winding-up court, was treated as the commencement of a legal proceeding against property in the court's custody and therefore as contempt. The court held that the statutory bar protected the company in liquidation and that the notice interfered with that custody and authority. Withdrawal of the notice and an unconditional apology did not erase the contempt, although the apology was accepted as showing good faith and absence of intent to defy the court. The contemner was found guilty of technical contempt, but no punishment was imposed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 09 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97608