https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281226 Provident Fund recovery could reach a security deposit held by a stock exchange because the deposit was treated as money belonging to the defaulting member and therefore recoverable under Section 8F of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The statutory scheme allowed the Commissioner to proceed against any person holding money for or on account of the employer, and provident fund dues had first charge priority under Section 11(2). Exchange bye-laws, lien rights and contractual priority could not override the statutory mandate. The attachment was upheld and the challenge failed. en-us Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281226 Provident Fund recovery could reach a security deposit held by a stock exchange because the deposit was treated as money belonging to the defaulting member and therefore recoverable under Section 8F of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The statutory scheme allowed the Commissioner to proceed against any person holding money for or on account of the employer, and provident fund dues had first charge priority under Section 11(2). Exchange bye-laws, lien rights and contractual priority could not override the statutory mandate. The attachment was upheld and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281226