<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (8) TMI 356 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384167</link>
    <description>A secured creditor under SARFAESI was held entitled to priority over an income-tax attachment, so the attachment over the mortgaged property could not be continued and the sale certificate could be registered. The property had been mortgaged by a corporate guarantor for the borrower&#039;s loan, and the bank had already effected a sale in favour of a successful bidder. The Court noted that a secured creditor&#039;s claim prevails over other dues, including Crown debts, and that the attached property belonged to the corporate guarantor, who was not the tax defaulter. On that basis, the tax attachment was not justified for recovery of the borrower&#039;s tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2019 09:24:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=582743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 356 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384167</link>
      <description>A secured creditor under SARFAESI was held entitled to priority over an income-tax attachment, so the attachment over the mortgaged property could not be continued and the sale certificate could be registered. The property had been mortgaged by a corporate guarantor for the borrower&#039;s loan, and the bank had already effected a sale in favour of a successful bidder. The Court noted that a secured creditor&#039;s claim prevails over other dues, including Crown debts, and that the attached property belonged to the corporate guarantor, who was not the tax defaulter. On that basis, the tax attachment was not justified for recovery of the borrower&#039;s tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384167</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>