SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Del) 147

High Court Of Delhi
SUDERSHAN TALKIES DELHI PRIVATE LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR OF STAMPS - Respondent
Stamp Duty Reference 1 of 1970
Decided On : 11/16/1977

Advocates Appeared:
R.K.Anand, T.N.Sethi, Y.K.SABHARVAL

Transfer duty under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act is not subject to the provisions of sections 33 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act regarding impoundment and penalty.

Headnote:

STAMP ACT - SECTION 33, 40 - DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT - SECTION 147 - TRANSFER DUTY - IMPOUNDMENT AND PENALTY - NOT SUBJECT TO PROVISIONS OF STAMP ACT - QUESTION REFERRED TO ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, Sudershan Talkies (Delhi) Private Ltd., took over the business of Sudershan Talkies, including its assets and liabilities, and allotted 1440 equity shares of Rs. 100 each to the owners. A return was filed with the Registrar of Companies under section 75(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, and Form 3 was furnished under section 75(2) since no deed was executed. The Assistant Registrar of Companies impounded the Form 3, considering it not properly stamped, and forwarded it to the Collector of Stamps for realizing the proper stamp duty and penalty. The Collector agreed and demanded stamp duty, transfer duty, and penalty. The petitioner challenged the order in revision before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and filed a writ petition in the High Court. The High Court stayed the recovery of the amount and directed the petitioner to apply for a reference to the High Court under section 57 of the Stamp Act.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court held that the transfer duty leviable under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act is not subject to the provisions of sections 33 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act regarding impoundment and penalty. The transfer duty is levied and collected over and above the stamp duty and goes to the Corporation fund. It is not a percentage of the stamp duty but a percentage of the amount or value of the consideration for the sale. Therefore, a sale deed is not chargeable to transfer duty under the Stamp Act and cannot be impounded or subjected to a penalty under the Stamp Act for non-payment or insufficient payment of transfer duty.

Issues: Whether transfer duty under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, which is recoverable as a surcharge, is subject to the provisions of sections 33 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act in regard to impoundment and penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: The transfer duty leviable under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act is not subject to the provisions of sections 33 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act regarding impoundment and penalty. The transfer duty is levied and collected over and above the stamp duty and goes to the Corporation fund. It is not a percentage of the stamp duty but a percentage of the amount or value of the consideration for the sale. Therefore, a sale deed is not chargeable to transfer duty under the Stamp Act and cannot be impounded or subjected to a penalty under the Stamp Act for non-payment or insufficient payment of transfer duty.

Final Decision: The question referred to the High Court is answered in the negative. However, the parties are left to bear their respective costs.

PRITHVI RAJ

( 1 ) SUDERSHAN Talkies (Delhi) Private Ltd. (herein called the petitioner) took over the business of Sudershan Talkies, including its assets and liabilities, owned by Sarvshri Brij Lal Chawla and Surender Chawla in lieu of which 1440 equity shares of Rs. 100. 00 each of Sudershan Talkies (Private) Ltd. were allotted to them. The Company in pursuance of the provisions of section 75 (1) of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) (herein called. the Companies Act) filed a return before the Registrar of Companies in respect of the said 1440 fully paid up shares for Rs. 100. 00 each allotted to Brij Lal Chawla and Surender Chawla for having acquired the business of Sudershan Talkies for a total consideration of Rs. 1,45,354. 85 paise. Since no deed had been executed between the parties in respect of this transaction the particulars of the contract for allotment of the above-said shares, required to be furnished under section 75 (2) of the Companies Act, were furnished in Form 3 prescribed under the Companies Act. Stamp duty of Rs. 5. 00 was paid on Form 3, by affixing the adhesive stamp of the said value on it.

( 2 ) THE Assistant Registrar of Companies, on examining Form 3, was of the view that the document was not properly stamped. He accordingly impounded the same and forwarded it under section 38 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act II of 1899) (herein called the stamp ;act ) to the Collector of Stamps for realising the proper stamp duty together with the penalty. The Collector agreed with this view holding that if the contract particulars of which were supplied in Form 3, had been reduced to writing, it would have been a deed of conveyance of immovable property. The Collector by his order dated 17th May, 1969, required the petitioners to make good the deficiency of stamp duly amounting to Rs. 4365. 00 as also pay the sum of Rs. 7,267. 75 paise as transfer duty under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act along with penalty in the sum of Rs. 11,627. 75 paise. "the petitioner challenged the said order in revision before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority but remained unsuccessful. Aggrieved by the order dated 30th September, 1969, passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, the petitioner challenged the same in Civil Writ Petition No. 1317 of 1969. By C. M. petition No. 1556-W of 1969 filed along with the writ petition, the petitioner prayed that the Collector be restrained from effecting recovery of the amount demanded. V. S. Deshpande J. before whom C. M. P. No. 1556-W of 1969 came up for hearing stayed the recovery of the amount, on the condition that the petitioner was to make an application to the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority for making a reference to this Court under section 57 of the Stamp Act. The petitioner accordingly made an application before the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority contending that the following substantial questions of law were involved in the case which should be REFERRED TO to the High Court :

(1) Whether a return under section 75 of the Complies act in this case amounts to a sale deed or it is only an agreement to sell though the property conveyed includes immovable property which could not be sold or conveyed otherwise than by a registered sale deed.

(2) Whether the immovable property included in the said return could validly be conveyed by the said return under section 75 of the Companies Act and the firm concerned was not required to execute another deed of sale duly stamped and registered.

(3) Whether a return under section 75 of the Companies Act which purports to convey property including immovable property is an agreement to transfer property in future and is thus not a conveyance.

(4) Whether the duty on transfer of property charged under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act be treated at par with the duties leviable under the Stamp Act for the purposes of the penalty.

( 3 ) THE Chief Controlling Revenue Authority by its order dated 11th







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top