https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207128 After omission of Rule 173Q(2) and Rule 211 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, excise authorities could not validly confiscate a borrower's land, building, plant and machinery under the omitted regime or treat the property as vested in the Central Government; the confiscation order was without jurisdiction. Government excise dues also did not override a bank's secured debt, because crown debt has no priority over a secured creditor absent an express statutory first charge. The secured creditor's rights under the Securitization Act therefore prevailed, and possession assistance for the secured assets was justified. en-us Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Nov 2011 07:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207128 After omission of Rule 173Q(2) and Rule 211 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, excise authorities could not validly confiscate a borrower's land, building, plant and machinery under the omitted regime or treat the property as vested in the Central Government; the confiscation order was without jurisdiction. Government excise dues also did not override a bank's secured debt, because crown debt has no priority over a secured creditor absent an express statutory first charge. The secured creditor's rights under the Securitization Act therefore prevailed, and possession assistance for the secured assets was justified. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207128