https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292927 In winding-up proceedings, company property is in the custody of the court, and any legal proceeding for recovery against the company or its official liquidator requires leave under section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956. A notice issued under section 46(5A) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 against the official liquidator without such leave was treated as a revenue recovery step that interfered with the court's custody and amounted to technical contempt. The unconditional apology was accepted as showing contrition and resulted in no punishment, but it did not extinguish the contempt or prevent a finding of guilt. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jan 2021 11:31:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292927 In winding-up proceedings, company property is in the custody of the court, and any legal proceeding for recovery against the company or its official liquidator requires leave under section 446(1) of the Companies Act, 1956. A notice issued under section 46(5A) of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 against the official liquidator without such leave was treated as a revenue recovery step that interfered with the court's custody and amounted to technical contempt. The unconditional apology was accepted as showing contrition and resulted in no punishment, but it did not extinguish the contempt or prevent a finding of guilt. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Sep 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292927