Petitioner, as assignee of right, title and interest of the credit facilities to one Classic Diamonds (India) Ltd. (Borrower) (now in liquidation) purporting to have a superior secured and prior charge in time over the attached properties, having commenced proceedings under the \u00a0SARFAESI\/Securitisation Act by issue of notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) and having taken possession of one of the attached properties (as will be described hereinafter), is aggrieved by the order of attachment dated 17th January 2013 passed by the Respondent No.1 i.e., Tax Recovery Officer (TRO), seeking recovery of Income Tax dues of the Borrower. The issue arising herein, whether the secured debt assigned in favour of Petitioner has a priority over Government dues\/tax dues. Relying on the decision of the Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court in the case of Bombay Stock Exchange v. V. S. Kandalgaokar (2015) 2 SCC 1 and a decision of this Court in the case of State Bank of India v. . State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2020) SCC online Bom 4190 held that the charge of secured creditor would have priority over Government dues under the Income- Tax Act. There is no provision in the Income -Tax Act which provides for any paramountcy of the dues of the Income -Tax department over secured debt. \u00a0\u00a0( WP(L) NO. 7964 of 2021 dt .28 -7 -2021 )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002 ( SARFAESI Act, 2002) <\/p>\n
S. 13(2): Enforcement of security interest – Recovery of Dues \u2013 Priority of debtor \u2013 The charge of secured creditor would have priority over Government dues under the Income- Tax Act. [ S. 3. 13(4),34(1), 35 , ITACT, S. 226 , Art , 226 ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21141","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allied-laws"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-5uZ","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21141","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21141"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21141\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21142,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21141\/revisions\/21142"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21141"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21141"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21141"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}