1999 (2) TMI 470 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Preference of tax liabilities over secured creditors' claims.
2. Applicability of Section 178 of the Income-tax Act over Section 529A of the Companies Act.
3. Preference of workers' claims under Section 529A over tax dues under Section 178 of the Income-tax Act or the Sales Tax Act.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Preference of Tax Liabilities Over Secured Creditors' Claims:
The primary issue was whether tax liabilities like income-tax or sales tax have preference over the rights of secured creditors and workers concerning the sale proceeds of the Bhandup property. The applicants, who were secured creditors, contended that their claims should take precedence over the tax authorities' claims. The court referred to the apex court's judgment in Collector of Aurangabad v. Central Bank of India, which established that the common law doctrine of "priority of Crown debts" applies only to unsecured creditors and not to secured creditors. Therefore, the court held that the claims of the State for tax dues do not have preferential rights over the claims of secured creditors under the general law.

2. Applicability of Section 178 of the Income-tax Act Over Section 529A of the Companies Act:
The second issue was whether Section 178 of the Income-tax Act gives the State a preferential right over secured creditors under Section 529A of the Companies Act. The court analyzed the judgment in Imperial Chit Funds (P.) Ltd. v. ITO, which dealt with the preference of tax dues over unsecured creditors. It was clarified that the judgment did not address the rights of secured creditors. Section 529A of the Companies Act, which was introduced by an amendment in 1985, explicitly states that the dues of workers and debts due to secured creditors shall be paid in priority over all other debts. The court concluded that Section 529A has an overriding effect and prevails over Section 178 of the Income-tax Act, ensuring that the rights of secured creditors and workers take precedence over tax dues.

3. Preference of Workers' Claims Under Section 529A Over Tax Dues:
Although this issue did not directly arise in the matter, the court addressed it to clarify the observations in previous judgments. The court reiterated that Section 529A of the Companies Act gives workers' claims a priority that is pari passu with secured creditors' claims. The court referenced the judgment in Polyolefins Industries Ltd. v. Kosmek Plastics Manufacturing Co. Ltd., which held that workers' claims have preference over tax authorities' claims under Section 178 of the Income-tax Act. Therefore, the court affirmed that workers' claims under Section 529A have precedence over tax dues.

Relief Granted:
The court noted that the claims by the applicants in Company Application Nos. 116 and 117 of 1998 were beyond time, and no application for condonation of delay was filed. Consequently, certain prayers could not be considered. However, the court allowed prayer (a) in Company Application No. 116 of 1998, which pertained to the reimbursement of expenses incurred for the sale of securities, with interest at the rate of 11% per annum. The applicants were given the liberty to reapply for reliefs after seeking condonation of delay. Additionally, the court permitted the applicants to propose a higher interest rate for deposited funds if they chose to reapply.

Conclusion:
The judgment clarified that under both general law and the provisions of the Companies Act, the rights of secured creditors and workers under Section 529A override the claims of tax authorities under Section 178 of the Income-tax Act. The objections raised by the official liquidator were rejected, and the court provided specific reliefs to the applicants while allowing them the opportunity to reapply for further reliefs after addressing the issue of delayed claims.