<?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>2007 (5) TMI 328 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111266</link>
    <description>A provisional liquidator appointed after admission and advertisement of a winding-up petition may invoke the company court&#039;s protective powers before a formal winding-up order, and the absence of such an order does not make a challenge to a transfer incompetent. However, a transfer under section 531A of the Companies Act, 1956 will not be avoided unless it is shown to fall outside the ordinary course of business or to lack bona fides. On the facts, the sale was supported by consideration, possession had been delivered, and no material showed it to be a sham transaction. The challenge to annul the sale deed therefore failed and the transfer was allowed to stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:17:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 328 - HIGH COURT OF PATNA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111266</link>
      <description>A provisional liquidator appointed after admission and advertisement of a winding-up petition may invoke the company court&#039;s protective powers before a formal winding-up order, and the absence of such an order does not make a challenge to a transfer incompetent. However, a transfer under section 531A of the Companies Act, 1956 will not be avoided unless it is shown to fall outside the ordinary course of business or to lack bona fides. On the facts, the sale was supported by consideration, possession had been delivered, and no material showed it to be a sham transaction. The challenge to annul the sale deed therefore failed and the transfer was allowed to stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111266</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>