<?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>2023 (1) TMI 1396 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456571</link>
    <description>A secured creditor&#039;s claim under the SARFAESI regime was held to have priority over State sales tax dues, because the property was already mortgaged to the bank and formed part of a secured asset. Applying Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the Court recognised that a secured creditor&#039;s debt prevails over Government revenues, taxes, cesses and other charges. The purchaser, having bought the property in a public e-auction, paid the full consideration and obtained a sale certificate and registered sale deed, was entitled to protection of that title. The State&#039;s revenue charge could not defeat the prior security interest or the auction purchaser&#039;s rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2024 20:46:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=762568" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 1396 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456571</link>
      <description>A secured creditor&#039;s claim under the SARFAESI regime was held to have priority over State sales tax dues, because the property was already mortgaged to the bank and formed part of a secured asset. Applying Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the Court recognised that a secured creditor&#039;s debt prevails over Government revenues, taxes, cesses and other charges. The purchaser, having bought the property in a public e-auction, paid the full consideration and obtained a sale certificate and registered sale deed, was entitled to protection of that title. The State&#039;s revenue charge could not defeat the prior security interest or the auction purchaser&#039;s rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456571</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>