https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376331 Provident fund dues claimed by a statutory authority were held not to enjoy an overriding priority over the insolvency waterfall, because the later non obstante clause in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevails over inconsistent priority provisions in provident fund law. The claim therefore had to be dealt with under the liquidation distribution scheme rather than as an absolute first charge. The liquidator's partial rejection of the claim and the deduction made for loss relating to missing machinery were also upheld, as the record supported the verification exercise and the claim was found to be outside the permissible liquidation claim process. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Mar 2019 07:46:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376331 Provident fund dues claimed by a statutory authority were held not to enjoy an overriding priority over the insolvency waterfall, because the later non obstante clause in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code prevails over inconsistent priority provisions in provident fund law. The claim therefore had to be dealt with under the liquidation distribution scheme rather than as an absolute first charge. The liquidator's partial rejection of the claim and the deduction made for loss relating to missing machinery were also upheld, as the record supported the verification exercise and the claim was found to be outside the permissible liquidation claim process. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376331