<?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>1998 (1) TMI 401 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103576</link>
    <description>A winding-up petition is not maintainable where the debt is genuinely and bona fide disputed, but the dispute must be shown to be in good faith, supported by substance, and backed by prima facie material. On the facts, the company had admitted receipt of the goods and did not dispute the invoice value in earlier replies, then raised sub-standard quality only after payment was demanded, without timely complaint or return of the goods. Applying the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, retention of goods without rejection within a reasonable time amounted to acceptance and left the buyer liable to pay. The later inconsistent defence was not bona fide, the debt was treated as due and payable, and a prima facie case for winding-up was made out.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:46:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 401 - HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103576</link>
      <description>A winding-up petition is not maintainable where the debt is genuinely and bona fide disputed, but the dispute must be shown to be in good faith, supported by substance, and backed by prima facie material. On the facts, the company had admitted receipt of the goods and did not dispute the invoice value in earlier replies, then raised sub-standard quality only after payment was demanded, without timely complaint or return of the goods. Applying the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, retention of goods without rejection within a reasonable time amounted to acceptance and left the buyer liable to pay. The later inconsistent defence was not bona fide, the debt was treated as due and payable, and a prima facie case for winding-up was made out.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103576</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>