<?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 (11) TMI 248 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369905</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the winding up petition due to insufficient evidence of debt, lack of clarity on liability, and the decision of the newly elected management to withdraw the petition. The court also declined the transfer of proceedings to the NCLT, emphasizing the need to expedite proceedings based on merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2018 11:27:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=540784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 248 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369905</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the winding up petition due to insufficient evidence of debt, lack of clarity on liability, and the decision of the newly elected management to withdraw the petition. The court also declined the transfer of proceedings to the NCLT, emphasizing the need to expedite proceedings based on merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>