<?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>2005 (10) TMI 281 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111023</link>
    <description>A transfer of a company&#039;s property was examined for bona fide purchase, fair market value and protection against challenge in winding-up proceedings. The court considered the apparent undervalue, the hurried execution, the payment of substantial additional stamp duty, doubtful delivery of possession, and the lack of convincing evidence that the sale was made in the ordinary course or for the genuine benefit of the company and its creditors. Permission from income-tax authorities was treated as non-conclusive on market value or good faith. The transaction was found not to bear the indicia of a bona fide transfer for value in good faith, so the appellant could not sustain the transfer against the winding-up challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:40:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 281 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111023</link>
      <description>A transfer of a company&#039;s property was examined for bona fide purchase, fair market value and protection against challenge in winding-up proceedings. The court considered the apparent undervalue, the hurried execution, the payment of substantial additional stamp duty, doubtful delivery of possession, and the lack of convincing evidence that the sale was made in the ordinary course or for the genuine benefit of the company and its creditors. Permission from income-tax authorities was treated as non-conclusive on market value or good faith. The transaction was found not to bear the indicia of a bona fide transfer for value in good faith, so the appellant could not sustain the transfer against the winding-up challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>