<?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>1992 (5) TMI 169 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102329</link>
    <description>Directors&#039; obligation to file the company&#039;s statement of affairs arises on winding up and the appointment of the official liquidator, and the statutory period is 21 days, extendable only for recorded reasons within the permitted limit. The note explains that service of notices and the directors&#039; knowledge of the liquidation proceedings supported liability, while no valid extension was sought or granted. It also rejects the argument that the official liquidator had to issue a separate notice, because the statutory duty to file rests on the directors themselves. Monetary punishment is discussed as the consequence for non-compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:11:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139378" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (5) TMI 169 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102329</link>
      <description>Directors&#039; obligation to file the company&#039;s statement of affairs arises on winding up and the appointment of the official liquidator, and the statutory period is 21 days, extendable only for recorded reasons within the permitted limit. The note explains that service of notices and the directors&#039; knowledge of the liquidation proceedings supported liability, while no valid extension was sought or granted. It also rejects the argument that the official liquidator had to issue a separate notice, because the statutory duty to file rests on the directors themselves. Monetary punishment is discussed as the consequence for non-compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>