https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771101 A valid State law protecting depositors and providing for attachment and vesting of properties in a competent authority prevails over priority claims based on SARFAESI and the RDB Act in respect of properties attached under that law. The attached assets are not treated as ordinary secured assets for creditor priority purposes, and the non obstante clauses in the central recovery statutes do not displace the State enactment. The same attachment and vesting mechanism also keeps such properties outside the ordinary insolvency pool, so the IBC moratorium does not defeat execution where no direct statutory inconsistency is shown. On both issues, the committee's approach was upheld. en-us Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 May 2025 11:09:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771101 A valid State law protecting depositors and providing for attachment and vesting of properties in a competent authority prevails over priority claims based on SARFAESI and the RDB Act in respect of properties attached under that law. The attached assets are not treated as ordinary secured assets for creditor priority purposes, and the non obstante clauses in the central recovery statutes do not displace the State enactment. The same attachment and vesting mechanism also keeps such properties outside the ordinary insolvency pool, so the IBC moratorium does not defeat execution where no direct statutory inconsistency is shown. On both issues, the committee's approach was upheld. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771101