<?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 (10) TMI 394 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103777</link>
    <description>The court found the winding-up petition maintainable as the respondent had admitted liability. Despite challenges to the affidavit&#039;s validity, the court allowed for a rectification. Allegations of irregular supply were dismissed due to lack of evidence, and the respondent&#039;s admissions of liability undermined their defense. Consequently, the court admitted the winding-up petition, providing the petitioner a chance to submit a compliant affidavit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 394 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103777</link>
      <description>The court found the winding-up petition maintainable as the respondent had admitted liability. Despite challenges to the affidavit&#039;s validity, the court allowed for a rectification. Allegations of irregular supply were dismissed due to lack of evidence, and the respondent&#039;s admissions of liability undermined their defense. Consequently, the court admitted the winding-up petition, providing the petitioner a chance to submit a compliant affidavit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>