https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109317 Chapter III-B of the RBI Act did not exclude a creditor's right to present a winding-up petition under the Companies Act where the company was unable to pay its debts. A repayment scheme before the Company Law Board also did not bar winding up, because the decisive question was whether the scheme had been bona fide implemented; persistent non-payment established inability to pay. Technical objections to statutory notice and petition procedure were treated as irregularities that did not defeat maintainability. The Court further applied lifting of the corporate veil where depositors' funds were routed through controlled sister concerns, allowing connected assets to be proceeded against to prevent misuse of separate corporate personality. en-us Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:15:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109317 Chapter III-B of the RBI Act did not exclude a creditor's right to present a winding-up petition under the Companies Act where the company was unable to pay its debts. A repayment scheme before the Company Law Board also did not bar winding up, because the decisive question was whether the scheme had been bona fide implemented; persistent non-payment established inability to pay. Technical objections to statutory notice and petition procedure were treated as irregularities that did not defeat maintainability. The Court further applied lifting of the corporate veil where depositors' funds were routed through controlled sister concerns, allowing connected assets to be proceeded against to prevent misuse of separate corporate personality. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109317