<?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>2017 (7) TMI 879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345767</link>
    <description>Delayed objections to alleged defects in goods do not negate an admitted debt where the goods were installed and commissioned to the buyer&#039;s satisfaction, the installation reports recorded approval, the C-Form acknowledged receipt of invoices and goods, and an email admitted the outstanding balance. On the stated facts, the defence was not a bona fide dispute because the complaint about possible weakness in the plastic mesh was raised only after a long delay and was addressed by the supplier. The cited approach under Sections 41 and 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 treats retention of goods without timely rejection as acceptance, so a mere belated technical objection and a plea of solvency do not defeat admission of the winding up petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 20:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=483085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 879 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345767</link>
      <description>Delayed objections to alleged defects in goods do not negate an admitted debt where the goods were installed and commissioned to the buyer&#039;s satisfaction, the installation reports recorded approval, the C-Form acknowledged receipt of invoices and goods, and an email admitted the outstanding balance. On the stated facts, the defence was not a bona fide dispute because the complaint about possible weakness in the plastic mesh was raised only after a long delay and was addressed by the supplier. The cited approach under Sections 41 and 42 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 treats retention of goods without timely rejection as acceptance, so a mere belated technical objection and a plea of solvency do not defeat admission of the winding up petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>