TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (2) TMI 613
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l works at the factory premises of the respondent-company at Ghaziabad on May 6, 1993. A copy of the said agreement has been placed on record. According to the petitioner, it completed the entire work in terms of the agreement and even rendered electrical consultancy services to the respondent-company, as desired. A certificate dated February 1,1995, was issued in favour of the petitioner by the respondent-company appreciating their work. For the entire work done, the petitioner raised 18 bills for a total value of Rs. 5,22,122.68, out of which it is stated that a sum of Rs. 3,84,834 was actually paid and the income-tax at source was deducted for the years 1993-94 and 1994-95 leaving a net balance of Rs. 1,28,194.68. In addition thereto, a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unsel for the respondent was not present on September 18, 1998, the petitioner was directed to file the original copy of annexure P-2, i.e., the certificate issued by the respondent-company. The same was filed and the matter was finally heard on November 27,1998, in the absence of counsel for the respondent-company, as nobody had been appearing on its behalf on various dates. In the reply filed, there is a vague denial to the averments made in the petition. It is admitted that there was contract between the parties and the petitioner had carried out the work. The basic plea taken is that the claim of the petitioner was barred by time and secondly the entire payment had been made to the petitioner. In fact, according to the respondent-com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unt of the petitioner. There appears to be no justification for this entry. Neither the correspondence or terms of the contract has been referred to in the pleadings; nor any document has been placed on record to substantiate this claim before this court. There is no material on record on the basis of which the court can come to the conclusion that the deduction of the said amount is justified or even raise a bona fide claim. No detail has been given in the statement of account as to when the alleged entry of debit in relation to the liquidated damages was made in the account. In fact, even copy of the original accounts has not been placed on record by the respondent-company. The company is obliged to maintain books of account in discharge ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dy recorded above that there could be no justification for the entry of liquidated damages in the statement of accounts filed by the respondent-company. It is a settled principle of law that the defence raised in a winding up petition by the respondent-company must be bona fide and should be plausible. The defence raised by the respondent in the present case is neither bona fide nor is justifiable on any score. The petitioner-company has been able to show that the respondent-company owes the amount claimed by the petitioner and the respondent-company has failed to pay the said liability in spite of the due notice. Resultantly, it has to be construed that the respondent is unable to pay its debts, which are lawfully due to the petitioner.....