Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the secured creditor bank had priority over the Commercial Taxes Department in relation to the mortgaged property and the lease rentals, and whether the impugned notices and communications under the sales tax recovery provisions could be sustained.
Analysis: The bank's security interest was created in 1991, much before the tax department's impugned demands. Section 26E of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 gives priority to secured creditors after registration of security interest, notwithstanding any other law. Section 24 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 creates a charge and a recovery mechanism, but it does not create a first charge. The Court held that the special priority rule in Section 26E, together with the overriding effect of the secured-creditor regime, prevails over the department's claim. The authorities relied on by the Revenue were distinguished on the basis that they concerned statutes creating a specific first charge or different legal contexts.
Conclusion: The secured creditor's claim had priority over the sales tax department's demand, and the impugned notices and communications were unsustainable.