<?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>2012 (8) TMI 1115 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197270</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the winding-up petition as time-barred, ruling that the Form 3B receipt did not constitute an acknowledgment of the debt owed by the respondent. Emphasizing the necessity of acknowledging the debt explicitly, the court held that the mere acknowledgment of goods received was insufficient to extend the limitation period. The petition filed in 2009 for a debt due since 2004 was rejected due to the lack of a valid acknowledgment of the debt by the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2018 16:39:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (8) TMI 1115 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197270</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the winding-up petition as time-barred, ruling that the Form 3B receipt did not constitute an acknowledgment of the debt owed by the respondent. Emphasizing the necessity of acknowledging the debt explicitly, the court held that the mere acknowledgment of goods received was insufficient to extend the limitation period. The petition filed in 2009 for a debt due since 2004 was rejected due to the lack of a valid acknowledgment of the debt by the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197270</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>