<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1576 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463474</link>
    <description>A borrower may be declared a wilful defaulter only where diversion or siphoning of borrowed funds is established on objective consideration of all relevant material and a reasoned assessment of the borrower&#039;s reply. The Delhi High Court held that the declaration could not stand because the alleged investments in subsidiaries were shown to have been made from internal accruals, the lending banks were already aware of them through audited statements and restructuring material, and the source of funds was not proved to be borrowed money. The court also noted that the proceedings were initiated after an inordinate delay and that the relevant defence and material were not properly considered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2025 19:06:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=847834" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1576 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463474</link>
      <description>A borrower may be declared a wilful defaulter only where diversion or siphoning of borrowed funds is established on objective consideration of all relevant material and a reasoned assessment of the borrower&#039;s reply. The Delhi High Court held that the declaration could not stand because the alleged investments in subsidiaries were shown to have been made from internal accruals, the lending banks were already aware of them through audited statements and restructuring material, and the source of funds was not proved to be borrowed money. The court also noted that the proceedings were initiated after an inordinate delay and that the relevant defence and material were not properly considered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>