<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1332 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355911</link>
    <description>Belated debit notes cannot, by themselves, displace an otherwise admitted commercial liability when the underlying purchase orders, supplies, invoices and part-payments are undisputed. The text states that the buyer&#039;s objection was raised nearly two and a half years after supply, did not fit the contractual warranty clause, and lacked particulars or timely protest. It also notes that under Sections 41, 42 and 63 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, inspection and objection must be made within a reasonable time, which is a fact-sensitive inquiry. On these facts, the debit notes were treated as sham and the debt remained due and payable, so the impugned order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2018 06:28:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=509803" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1332 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355911</link>
      <description>Belated debit notes cannot, by themselves, displace an otherwise admitted commercial liability when the underlying purchase orders, supplies, invoices and part-payments are undisputed. The text states that the buyer&#039;s objection was raised nearly two and a half years after supply, did not fit the contractual warranty clause, and lacked particulars or timely protest. It also notes that under Sections 41, 42 and 63 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, inspection and objection must be made within a reasonable time, which is a fact-sensitive inquiry. On these facts, the debit notes were treated as sham and the debt remained due and payable, so the impugned order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355911</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>