<?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>2004 (12) TMI 387 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110289</link>
    <description>A sick industrial unit may retain the character of an industrial undertaking even if manufacturing has temporarily stopped, because the relevant definition extends to premises where manufacturing is ordinarily carried on, not only where production is presently active. On that basis, the narrow view that the company had ceased to be an industrial undertaking was rejected. The document also notes that a second reference is not barred by limitation when it is filed after the earlier sickness declaration has been reversed on appeal, since the company remained shown as sick until that appellate decision. The appellate order and dismissal of the second reference were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:24:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 387 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110289</link>
      <description>A sick industrial unit may retain the character of an industrial undertaking even if manufacturing has temporarily stopped, because the relevant definition extends to premises where manufacturing is ordinarily carried on, not only where production is presently active. On that basis, the narrow view that the company had ceased to be an industrial undertaking was rejected. The document also notes that a second reference is not barred by limitation when it is filed after the earlier sickness declaration has been reversed on appeal, since the company remained shown as sick until that appellate decision. The appellate order and dismissal of the second reference were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110289</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>