<?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>1999 (3) TMI 482 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104130</link>
    <description>The court admitted the winding-up petition under sections 433(e), 434, and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 due to the respondent limited company&#039;s failure to repay admitted debts for taxable paper cones supplied by the petitioner. The respondent&#039;s claims of material quality issues and settlement of accounts were dismissed as afterthoughts. Lack of evidence of poor material quality post-April 1998, coupled with the respondent&#039;s contradictory actions and failure to present a comprehensive defense, led to the court&#039;s decision. The respondent was directed to pay the due amount with interest, and notice of admission was to be published for parties&#039; awareness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:10:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 482 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104130</link>
      <description>The court admitted the winding-up petition under sections 433(e), 434, and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 due to the respondent limited company&#039;s failure to repay admitted debts for taxable paper cones supplied by the petitioner. The respondent&#039;s claims of material quality issues and settlement of accounts were dismissed as afterthoughts. Lack of evidence of poor material quality post-April 1998, coupled with the respondent&#039;s contradictory actions and failure to present a comprehensive defense, led to the court&#039;s decision. The respondent was directed to pay the due amount with interest, and notice of admission was to be published for parties&#039; awareness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>