<?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>2016 (3) TMI 1498 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470956</link>
    <description>Company winding-up principles supported admission of a petition where admitted investment and assured returns established a debt above the statutory threshold. Proposed adjustments for increased land costs and technology-related charges lacked contractual and documentary support. Applying ejusdem generis, the reference to taxes, charges and levies covered only charges similar to those specified and did not permit those adjustments. The absence of a functioning board, failure to comply with prior directions, and risk of asset dissipation warranted protective measures. The petition was admitted, and the Official Liquidator was appointed as provisional liquidator to secure and preserve assets, books and records.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2026 17:10:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=917178" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 1498 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470956</link>
      <description>Company winding-up principles supported admission of a petition where admitted investment and assured returns established a debt above the statutory threshold. Proposed adjustments for increased land costs and technology-related charges lacked contractual and documentary support. Applying ejusdem generis, the reference to taxes, charges and levies covered only charges similar to those specified and did not permit those adjustments. The absence of a functioning board, failure to comply with prior directions, and risk of asset dissipation warranted protective measures. The petition was admitted, and the Official Liquidator was appointed as provisional liquidator to secure and preserve assets, books and records.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>