https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374017 A secured creditor with a prior mortgage and hypothecation was held entitled to priority over a provisional attachment under the money-laundering law where the property had been validly secured before enforcement action and possession had been taken under the SARFAESI framework. The Tribunal applied the priority given to secured creditors under the amended recovery statutes and the principle that, where competing special statutes contain non obstante clauses, the later enactment prevails. It further noted that the property was not shown to be derived from proceeds of crime, so continued attachment could not be sustained against the bank's secured interest, and the attachment was set aside to that extent. en-us Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374017 A secured creditor with a prior mortgage and hypothecation was held entitled to priority over a provisional attachment under the money-laundering law where the property had been validly secured before enforcement action and possession had been taken under the SARFAESI framework. The Tribunal applied the priority given to secured creditors under the amended recovery statutes and the principle that, where competing special statutes contain non obstante clauses, the later enactment prevails. It further noted that the property was not shown to be derived from proceeds of crime, so continued attachment could not be sustained against the bank's secured interest, and the attachment was set aside to that extent. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374017