https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219842 A defence to a winding-up petition was rejected as illusory where the alleged alternative arrangement conflicted with the lease documents, contemporaneous records, and the party's own accounting and tax position. The court applied Sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, holding that written instruments cannot be contradicted by inconsistent oral assertions. It also stated that a litigant cannot adopt one stand for tax and accounting purposes and a contrary stand before the court, and that a case founded on concealment or illegality cannot be assisted by the court. The defence was therefore treated as moonshine and legally untenable, and the winding-up order was sustained. en-us Wed, 31 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219842 A defence to a winding-up petition was rejected as illusory where the alleged alternative arrangement conflicted with the lease documents, contemporaneous records, and the party's own accounting and tax position. The court applied Sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, holding that written instruments cannot be contradicted by inconsistent oral assertions. It also stated that a litigant cannot adopt one stand for tax and accounting purposes and a contrary stand before the court, and that a case founded on concealment or illegality cannot be assisted by the court. The defence was therefore treated as moonshine and legally untenable, and the winding-up order was sustained. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 31 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219842