https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16536 Where sale proceeds arise from recovery proceedings, the existence of a prior charge in favour of a decree-holder takes priority over the general Rule 8 obligation to remit surplus to the defaulter; the court held that realised amounts must first satisfy an intervening execution order and the prior charge even if the original sale proclamation omitted that liability. The Department was therefore entitled to apply auction proceeds to the decree-holder pursuant to the execution directions before any balance could be returned to the defaulter, and the appeal against that application was dismissed. en-us Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:33:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16536 Where sale proceeds arise from recovery proceedings, the existence of a prior charge in favour of a decree-holder takes priority over the general Rule 8 obligation to remit surplus to the defaulter; the court held that realised amounts must first satisfy an intervening execution order and the prior charge even if the original sale proclamation omitted that liability. The Department was therefore entitled to apply auction proceeds to the decree-holder pursuant to the execution directions before any balance could be returned to the defaulter, and the appeal against that application was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16536