<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1980 (4) TMI 269 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100000</link>
    <description>An admitted commission debt remained recoverable notwithstanding the company&#039;s objection that remittance required Reserve Bank of India approval. The correspondence showed acceptance of the petitioning creditor&#039;s role in procuring and negotiating the export contract, and the company acknowledged that commission was payable. The court treated regulatory approval as a step the company itself had to pursue and rejected the attempt to deny liability on that basis, especially where no bona fide effort to obtain permission was shown. Objections based on incomplete export performance and the absence of a quantified rupee demand also failed, because the debt was ascertainable and admitted. The winding-up petition was therefore maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:13:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (4) TMI 269 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100000</link>
      <description>An admitted commission debt remained recoverable notwithstanding the company&#039;s objection that remittance required Reserve Bank of India approval. The correspondence showed acceptance of the petitioning creditor&#039;s role in procuring and negotiating the export contract, and the company acknowledged that commission was payable. The court treated regulatory approval as a step the company itself had to pursue and rejected the attempt to deny liability on that basis, especially where no bona fide effort to obtain permission was shown. Objections based on incomplete export performance and the absence of a quantified rupee demand also failed, because the debt was ascertainable and admitted. The winding-up petition was therefore maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>