https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460201 The Calcutta HC dismissed a company's appeal against a winding-up petition filed by a creditor for dishonoured cheques. The company claimed bona fide defense citing supply of sub-standard goods, but the court found the contemporaneous correspondence disputable and insufficient to constitute constructive defense. The company failed to offer security when replying to the statutory notice or on the first returnable date under Section 434 of Companies Act 1956. The court held that offering security after completion of pleadings strengthened the presumption of willful neglect to pay admitted debt, constituting failure under Section 434(1)(a). The winding-up petition was upheld and appeal dismissed. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:46:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460201 The Calcutta HC dismissed a company's appeal against a winding-up petition filed by a creditor for dishonoured cheques. The company claimed bona fide defense citing supply of sub-standard goods, but the court found the contemporaneous correspondence disputable and insufficient to constitute constructive defense. The company failed to offer security when replying to the statutory notice or on the first returnable date under Section 434 of Companies Act 1956. The court held that offering security after completion of pleadings strengthened the presumption of willful neglect to pay admitted debt, constituting failure under Section 434(1)(a). The winding-up petition was upheld and appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 06 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460201