<?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>2013 (5) TMI 1077 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459937</link>
    <description>An objection that the petition was unsupported by a properly stamped and authorised power of attorney was treated as a curable defect, since the issue had not been raised in the pleadings and a fresh power of attorney had been permitted. The Court further held that a winding up petition could be admitted on the basis of an admitted and unpaid consultancy fee debt that satisfied the statutory threshold, even though the procurement agreement claims were disputed. Because the consultancy liability was not shown to be subject to any bona fide dispute, the technical authorisation objection did not defeat admission of the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2025 13:04:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 1077 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459937</link>
      <description>An objection that the petition was unsupported by a properly stamped and authorised power of attorney was treated as a curable defect, since the issue had not been raised in the pleadings and a fresh power of attorney had been permitted. The Court further held that a winding up petition could be admitted on the basis of an admitted and unpaid consultancy fee debt that satisfied the statutory threshold, even though the procurement agreement claims were disputed. Because the consultancy liability was not shown to be subject to any bona fide dispute, the technical authorisation objection did not defeat admission of the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>