https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758587 The Bombay HC held that a Sales Tax Department attachment under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 could not defeat a secured creditor's priority under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 unless the attachment was shown to have been effected in the manner required by the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and the applicable rules, including proclamation of attachment. Mere issuance of an attachment order was insufficient. As there was no material proving compliance with the prescribed revenue procedure, the department's claim did not override the secured creditor's statutory priority, and the secured creditor was entitled to priority over the attached dues. en-us Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Sep 2024 09:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758587 The Bombay HC held that a Sales Tax Department attachment under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 could not defeat a secured creditor's priority under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 unless the attachment was shown to have been effected in the manner required by the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and the applicable rules, including proclamation of attachment. Mere issuance of an attachment order was insufficient. As there was no material proving compliance with the prescribed revenue procedure, the department's claim did not override the secured creditor's statutory priority, and the secured creditor was entitled to priority over the attached dues. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758587