https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111892 Claims by an official liquidator based on a running account and repeated part-payments were held within limitation, because the transactions were treated as continuous dealings and the claim was filed within the period applied under the Limitation Act and Companies Act provisions noted in the text. The claim was also not rejected for want of primary documentary evidence, because the liquidator was entitled to rely on the company records, statement of affairs and audited materials available after winding up, and the absence of invoices not in his custody did not defeat a bona fide claim supported by the records obtained. The appeal failed and the payment order was sustained. en-us Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2014 19:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111892 Claims by an official liquidator based on a running account and repeated part-payments were held within limitation, because the transactions were treated as continuous dealings and the claim was filed within the period applied under the Limitation Act and Companies Act provisions noted in the text. The claim was also not rejected for want of primary documentary evidence, because the liquidator was entitled to rely on the company records, statement of affairs and audited materials available after winding up, and the absence of invoices not in his custody did not defeat a bona fide claim supported by the records obtained. The appeal failed and the payment order was sustained. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111892