Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

KAMILI PACKERS LTD Versus HIYA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD

Winding up petition - Held that:- On the basis of the material on record, the petitioner has succeeded, in primafacie establishing its case, especially, as the respondent-Company has not denied that it was liable to make the payment for the goods supplied by the petitioner which, according to it, was made to M/s.Unisilk Limited.

Considering all the above aspects and as no material has been produced on record substantiating the claim of the respondent-Company regarding the mutual agree .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Provisional Liquidator of the respondent-Company and is directed to take over the charge and possession of the assets of the respondent-Company and to prepare an inventory of the office premises, books of accounts and all other assets of the respondent-Company, as required.

At this stage, a request is made by Mr.Niral Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent-Company that the petition may not be advertised for a period of two weeks. The request is granted in the interest of justic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s of the Companies Act, 1956; b) this Hon ble Court be pleased to appoint the Official Liquidator, High Court, Gujarat, as Liquidator of the Company together with all its business, assets, properties, income and books of accounts with all the powers under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956; c) pending the hearing and final disposal of the Petition, the Official Liquidator, High Court, Gujarat, or some other fit and proper person be appointed the Provisional Liquidator of the Company together .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the assets and properties of the Company or on any part thereof; e) for ad interim reliefs in terms of prayers (c) and (d); f) this Hon ble Court be pleased to pass such further and other orders as the nature and circumstances of the case may require; g) the costs of the present Petition be granted to the Petitioner. 2. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the laws of Kenya and is carrying on the business of exporting grains to various countries, including India. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the destinations required by the said Company, the said goods. The petitioner was assured payment immediately upon receipt of the goods. As it already had dealings with the respondent-Company, earlier, the petitioner supplied the goods without insisting on an advance, or even a Letter of Credit in respect of the orders placed by the respondent-Company. Many a times, the goods were loaded in the presence of, and under the supervision of, one Mr.Vijay Patel, the representative of the respondent-C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egating to US$ 3,019,498=50 was due and payable by the respondent-Company, against which, the respondent-Company has paid to the petitioner, an amount aggregating US$ 1,940,365=50 only, from time to time, but has failed to pay the balance amount of US$ 1,079,133=00, which, as stated above, is due and payable to the petitioner. The petitioner repeatedly followed up with the respondent-Company for the payment of the balance outstanding amount. According to the petitioner, the respondent-Company as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ceedings against the Company. The respondent-Company replied to the statutory notice vide a communication dated 05.04.2014, denying the averments made in the statutory notice issued by the petitioner and contending that the notice was vague and, therefore, the petitioner was advised to call for strict and proper evidence in support of its claim. It is the case of the petitioner that the denial in the reply dated 05.04.2014, is without justification and not bona fide, but has been made only with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 5. This Court has heard Mr.A.S.Vakil, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Niral Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent. 6. It is submitted by Mr.A.S.Vakil, learned advocate for the petitioner, that there is no dispute, whatsoever, in respect of the goods sold and delivered to the respondent-Company and the amount due in respect thereto. The respondent-Company is wrongly denying the claim of the petitioner as an afterthought, which denial should be disregarded by this Court. 7. It is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted by Mr.Vakil that nothing to this effect has been stated in the reply to the statutory notice given by the respondent-Company, on 05.04.2014. There is no mention in the said reply regarding M/s.Unisilk Limited, or any agreement purported to have been entered into between the petitioner, the respondent-Company and M/s.Unisilk Limited, to the effect that the payment for the goods supplied directly by the petitioner to the respondent is to be made to M/s.Unisilk Limited. Nor is it stated that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ods. The respondent-Company has come out with a new case for the first time before this Court, that the invoices are disputed and that there were issues regarding the quality and timely delivery of the goods in question. Had that been the case, nothing had prevented the respondent-Company from stating so in the reply. In any case, the contention that there were issues regarding the timely delivery and the quality of goods between the respondent-Company and the petitioner is not substantiated by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spondent-Company is unable to pay its dues. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent-Company is in debt to the State Bank of India, which has issued public notices in the English daily newspaper The Times of India on 10.11.2015. In one of the notices, the respondent-Company is one of the guarantors, as is Mr.Vijay Arvindbhai Patel, the deponent of the affidavitinreply and the affidavitinsurrejoinder. In the other notice, the respondent-Company is the borrower. Pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

scharged its liability towards interest to the Bank is also incorrect, as the State Bank of India has also filed O.A. No.433 of 2015, before the Debt Recovery TribunalI, Ahmedabad, under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 ( RDDB Act ), for the recovery of ₹ 18,15,95,360/, with interest. The said averments are, therefore, false to the knowledge of the petitioner, though they have been stated on oath, which amounts to perjury. 11. It is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

id Bills of Lading correspond to the invoices produced by the petitioner. 12. It is next submitted on behalf of the petitioner that no communication between the respondent-Company and M/s.Unisilk Limited, to establish the alleged claim of the respondent-Company of making payment of the dues of the petitioner to M/s.Unisilk Limited has been produced on record. 13. It has now been contended by the respondent-Company that earlier, it was transacting business with the petitioner directly, but due to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ngth of the above submissions, it is contended by Mr.A.S.Vakil, learned advocate for the petitioner, that the material on record would establish that the debt of the petitioner is due and payable by the respondent. The respondent-Company is unable to pay its liabilities and, therefore, it can be concluded that it has lost its financial substratum, therefore, the petition be admitted and advertised. 15. Per contra, Mr.Niral Mehta, learned advocate for the respondent-Company, has submitted that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dates of the invoices are the same as the seven invoices produced by the petitioner and the invoices produced by the respondent show that payment for the goods in question was made to M/s.Unisilk Limited by the respondent-Company. 16. It is further submitted on behalf of the respondent that the Bank has also cleared the said payment and it was M/s.Unisilk Limited that was to further transmit the amount to the petitioner as per the mutual agreement. The respondent-Company has, therefore, paid al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2 of the paperbook, wherein, it is shown that the petitioner has made payments between ₹ 15 lakhs to ₹ 50 lakhs between 27.11.2014 to 09.04.2015, to its creditors. 18. It is submitted that when the petition was filed, no recovery proceedings had been initiated by the State Bank of India against the respondent-Company. The said proceedings, which are now pending under the SARFAESI Act and the RDDB Act, are, therefore, not relevant insofar as the present petition is concerned. 19. It i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the petition and the contents of the other pleadings. 21. From the submissions advanced by learned counsel and the material on record, there does not appear to be any dispute regarding the fact that business transactions did took place between the petitioner and the respondent-Company for which certain payments had to be made by the respondent-Company. In that sense, therefore, there is no denial by the respondent-Company regarding the dues to be paid to the petitioner in respect of the transact .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e statutory notice dated 05.04.2014, the respondent-Company has only stated that the allegations against it are not specifically admitted by it and that the petitioner has not given a correct version of facts and the notice is vague. It is further stated that the notice is concocted and fabricated and is, therefore, disputed and not accepted by the respondent-Company. There is no denial in the said reply, of the transactions between the parties or the payments due to the petitionerCompany on acc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ther documents are produced to substantiate this claim of the respondent-Company, even if the statement of the respondent-Company is taken at its face value, one would expect that a Company with such a huge turnover would, at least, put into writing any agreement for payment of dues involving a huge amount between it, the petitioner and M/s.Unisilk Limited, into writing. No such agreement has been produced before this Court to substantiate the claim of the respondent-Company, that it was mutuall .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the statutory notice, which has not been done. The entire defence of the respondent-Company, therefore, rests on the socalled mutual agreement between it, the petitioner and M/s.Unisilk Limited. There is no communication or document of M/s.Unisilk Limited to the effect that such an agreement took place and that it was acting as a conduit for payments between the respondent-Company and the petitioner. 24. Insofar as the genuineness and authenticity of the invoices produced by the respondent-Comp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ings false. 25. The aspect that certain dues of the other creditors amounting to rupees fifteen to fifty lakhs have been paid by the respondent-Company would not detract from the fact that it is unwilling, or unable, to pay the dues of the petitionerCompany. 26. One more glaring aspect is that, though the respondent-Company claims to have a turnover of rupees one hundred crores in the year 201415, it has not produced any documents to this effect on the record of the petition. Moreover, there is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012

Forum: GST Invoice

Notification: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017

Circular: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg.

News: GST implementation smoother than expected: Jaitley

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

Forum: 3B mistake

Forum: Input tax credit

Forum: Excise duty credit on finished stock at additional place of business.

Forum: Due date of Filing TRAN-1

Highlight: Diversion of income at source - Joint venture agreement - 97% of the receipt transfer to M/s TRG Industries (P) Ltd. - scope of the agreement - it is diversion by overriding title - not taxable in the hands of assessee - HC

Highlight: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes u/s 35AC - After 01.04.2017 the legislature desired to withdraw such deduction. - The Union legislature was competent to introduce such amendment - HC

Highlight: Transfer of trading assets at cost price, the profit component also stood transferred to the outgoing Directors, which otherwise belonged to the Company - the fact that AO has made the addition in the hands of the Directors would not make any difference - additions confirmed - HC

Highlight: The interest u/s 234B of the Act cannot go beyond the stage of S.245D(I) before the Settlement Commission - HC

Highlight: Galvanized iron pipe is a different commercial commodity than a iron pipe, therefore the activity of galvanization in our considered opinion amounts to manufacture - Deduction u/s 80-IB allowed - HC

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271C - non deduction of TDS on interest paid to sister concerns in terms of Section 194A - Levy of penalty confirmed - HC

Highlight: Disallowance of interest - reference to section 179 - The legislature has also recognised, that the doctrine of lifting of veil in the matter of tax dues is to be applied to prevent fraud etc. and not where the company has suffered despite its normal bona fide function. - HC

News: RBI Reference Rate for US $

Notification: Amendment in Notification No. S.O. 3118(E), dated the 3rd October, 2016

Highlight: Discount on ESOP to be allowed as business expenditure u/s 37(1), during the years of vesting on the basis of percentage of vesting during such period, subject to upward or downward adjustment at the time of exercise of option.

Notification: Central Government appoints the 20th September, 2017 as the date on which proviso to clause (87) of section 2 of the Companies Act 2013, shall come into force

Notification: Companies (Restriction on number of layers) Rules, 2017

Highlight: Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - additional income disclosure - surrender of income post survey u/s 133A - he disclosure made by the assessee is voluntary in nature, in the revised return - no penalty

Highlight: Reopening of assessment - notice u/s 148 issued on the directions of JCIT / CIT - a perusal of reasons for initiating reassessment proceedings clearly show that they are against the sprit of provisions u/s 147

Highlight: MAT - Adjustment to book profit - computation u/clause (f) of Explanation-1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D of I.T. Rules.

Highlight: Addition on account of alleged suppression of service value received - the addition made simply believing the Form 26AS will be an arbitrary exercise of power which cannot be sustained

Notification: Exempts intra state supply of heavy water and nuclear fuels from DAE to NPCIL

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 12/2017-UTT(R) to exempt right to admission to the events organised under FIFA U-17 World Cup 2017

Notification: Seeks to amend notification No. 11/2017- UTT(R) to reduce CGST rate on specified supplies of Works Contract Services

Highlight: Liability to pay duty on import of software - Though no authorization was given by the appellant to DHL, it is an undisputed position that the software has, in fact, been ordered by the appellant and have been delivered to them by DHL - the appellant is to be considered as the importer



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version