https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784639 Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was treated as a machinery provision for assessment and recovery, not as a source of substantive security or a first charge over the corporate debtor's assets. As the statute did not create an express charging provision comparable to the Gujarat VAT framework, CST dues were held not to be secured debt. On that basis, the challenge to the approved resolution plan failed, because non-recognition of CST dues as secured claims did not breach the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The plan approval was therefore left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784639 Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was treated as a machinery provision for assessment and recovery, not as a source of substantive security or a first charge over the corporate debtor's assets. As the statute did not create an express charging provision comparable to the Gujarat VAT framework, CST dues were held not to be secured debt. On that basis, the challenge to the approved resolution plan failed, because non-recognition of CST dues as secured claims did not breach the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The plan approval was therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 07 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784639