https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754026 Section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 protects secured creditors against unsecured creditors but does not abolish inter se priority among secured creditors; that priority continues to be governed by section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Bombay HC upheld priority in favour of first charge holders over second charge holders, and found that the available liquidation proceeds were insufficient even to satisfy the first charge, leaving nothing for the second charge holders. It also refused to permit the Central Excise Department to lodge a fresh claim before the Recovery Officer because its earlier claim had already been rejected and that rejection was not challenged. en-us Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Jun 2024 11:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754026 Section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 protects secured creditors against unsecured creditors but does not abolish inter se priority among secured creditors; that priority continues to be governed by section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Bombay HC upheld priority in favour of first charge holders over second charge holders, and found that the available liquidation proceeds were insufficient even to satisfy the first charge, leaving nothing for the second charge holders. It also refused to permit the Central Excise Department to lodge a fresh claim before the Recovery Officer because its earlier claim had already been rejected and that rejection was not challenged. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 09 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754026