https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776887 The Madras HC held that a pre-existing tax attachment over a corporate debtor's property, created before commencement of CIRP and based on crystallised TNVAT dues, could not be ignored in liquidation. It treated the tax authority as a secured creditor because of its statutory charge and attachment, and held that in liquidation the creditor may either relinquish its security to participate in distribution or enforce its security under Section 52 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Court further held that failure to file a claim in CIRP or liquidation did not, by itself, extinguish the secured creditor's rights, and the liquidator could not disregard that status while dealing with the asset and sale proceeds. en-us Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:35:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776887 The Madras HC held that a pre-existing tax attachment over a corporate debtor's property, created before commencement of CIRP and based on crystallised TNVAT dues, could not be ignored in liquidation. It treated the tax authority as a secured creditor because of its statutory charge and attachment, and held that in liquidation the creditor may either relinquish its security to participate in distribution or enforce its security under Section 52 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Court further held that failure to file a claim in CIRP or liquidation did not, by itself, extinguish the secured creditor's rights, and the liquidator could not disregard that status while dealing with the asset and sale proceeds. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 14 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776887