https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106277 A winding up petition under section 433(e) lies only for a definite, admitted debt, not for a disputed claim dressed as debt recovery. The text explains that where the alleged liability arises from an excise arrangement, questions remain over who must pay, whether amended rules or executive directions authorise recovery, and whether the claim is really compensation or damages, the amount is not an undisputed debt due. It also states that a bona fide and substantial defence on limitation, the nature of the claim, and the company's commercial solvency bars admission and advertisement of the petition, because winding up cannot be used as a substitute for ordinary adjudication or debt enforcement. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:22:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106277 A winding up petition under section 433(e) lies only for a definite, admitted debt, not for a disputed claim dressed as debt recovery. The text explains that where the alleged liability arises from an excise arrangement, questions remain over who must pay, whether amended rules or executive directions authorise recovery, and whether the claim is really compensation or damages, the amount is not an undisputed debt due. It also states that a bona fide and substantial defence on limitation, the nature of the claim, and the company's commercial solvency bars admission and advertisement of the petition, because winding up cannot be used as a substitute for ordinary adjudication or debt enforcement. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106277