<?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>2010 (10) TMI 1240 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303828</link>
    <description>Amounts taken from bank funds for business purposes can fall within the wide definition of &quot;debt&quot; under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 even if the transaction was allegedly fraudulent and unsupported by formal documents. The Court emphasised that jurisdiction turns on the substance of the bank&#039;s legally recoverable claim, not the form of the transaction, and upheld recovery before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. It also sustained interest at 18% per annum, accepting the Tribunal&#039;s approach where the transaction was non-routine and no standard contractual interest stipulation existed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:35:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 1240 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303828</link>
      <description>Amounts taken from bank funds for business purposes can fall within the wide definition of &quot;debt&quot; under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 even if the transaction was allegedly fraudulent and unsupported by formal documents. The Court emphasised that jurisdiction turns on the substance of the bank&#039;s legally recoverable claim, not the form of the transaction, and upheld recovery before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. It also sustained interest at 18% per annum, accepting the Tribunal&#039;s approach where the transaction was non-routine and no standard contractual interest stipulation existed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303828</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>