<?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 333 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111271</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition for winding up the respondent company under section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956. The court found that there was a bona fide dispute regarding the debt owed, specifically concerning the agreed commission rate and interest. The respondent&#039;s financial solvency was supported by audited balance sheets, and the court emphasized that winding-up petitions should not be used to settle disputed debts. As a result, the petition was dismissed, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 15:38:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148287" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 333 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111271</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition for winding up the respondent company under section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956. The court found that there was a bona fide dispute regarding the debt owed, specifically concerning the agreed commission rate and interest. The respondent&#039;s financial solvency was supported by audited balance sheets, and the court emphasized that winding-up petitions should not be used to settle disputed debts. As a result, the petition was dismissed, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>