https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773561 Bombay HC dismissed an appeal against a winding up order under Section 433(e) of Companies Act, 1956. The appellant-company failed to refund a Rs.50 lakh security deposit after contract termination and business decline. The court found the company's defenses neither plausible nor bona fide, noting financial institutions had filed recovery proceedings for crores, a receiver was appointed, and no production activities occurred for over five years. The company offered payment during proceedings but made none. The HC upheld the winding up order, confirming liability to repay the deposit with interest. en-us Mon, 23 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Jun 2025 09:23:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773561 Bombay HC dismissed an appeal against a winding up order under Section 433(e) of Companies Act, 1956. The appellant-company failed to refund a Rs.50 lakh security deposit after contract termination and business decline. The court found the company's defenses neither plausible nor bona fide, noting financial institutions had filed recovery proceedings for crores, a receiver was appointed, and no production activities occurred for over five years. The company offered payment during proceedings but made none. The HC upheld the winding up order, confirming liability to repay the deposit with interest. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 23 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773561