<?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 (4) TMI 497 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104162</link>
    <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 suspends winding up and other coercive proceedings against a sick industrial company during the statutory rehabilitation stage unless consent is granted. An ordinary money claim does not escape that embargo merely because it arose after sanction of the rehabilitation scheme and was omitted from the scheme. The Calcutta High Court distinguished the narrow revenue-tax context in which the Supreme Court had relaxed the bar, and held that the exception did not apply to a private debt claim. The winding up application was therefore barred and could not proceed for the time being.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:40:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 497 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104162</link>
      <description>Section 22(1) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 suspends winding up and other coercive proceedings against a sick industrial company during the statutory rehabilitation stage unless consent is granted. An ordinary money claim does not escape that embargo merely because it arose after sanction of the rehabilitation scheme and was omitted from the scheme. The Calcutta High Court distinguished the narrow revenue-tax context in which the Supreme Court had relaxed the bar, and held that the exception did not apply to a private debt claim. The winding up application was therefore barred and could not proceed for the time being.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>