N. SATHISH KUMAR
Balaji Fibre – Appellant
Versus
Inspector General of Registration Office of the Inspector General of Registration – Respondent
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order in Na.Ka. No.47 of 2021 dated 13.12.2021 passed by the 5th respondent and consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in Mu.Pa.No.247 of 2022 dated 18.04.2022 and quash the same as illegal and ultravires and consequently direct the 1st respondent to refund the excess stamp duty and registration charges amounting to Rs.13,95,000/- paid by petitioner for registration of sale certificates before the 5th respondent.
Commonality involved in all the writ petitions, this Court is inclined to dispose of these writ petitions by way of this Common Order.
W.P.No.415 of 2023
2.This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 13.12.2021 passed by the fifth respondent in referring the sale certificate presented by the petitioner under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act and consequential order dated 18.04.2022 passed by the third respondent seeking for payment of deficit stamp duty. It is the case of th
Inspector General of Registration v K.K Thirumurugan reported in 2015 1 CTC 526
B. Arvind Kumar v Govt of India reported in (2007) 5 SCC 745
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs. P.Kesavan and another reported in (2004) 9 SCC 77
Dr Meera Thinakaran v State of T.N
Dr.R.Thiagarajan v. Inspector General of Registration
Dr.R.Thiagarajan vs. Inspector General of Registration reported in (2019) 6 MLJ 257 (FB)
Esjaypee Impex Private Limited v. Assistant General Manager and Authorised Officer, Canara Bank
In Re, The Official Liquidator, High Court
K. Chidambara Manickam v Shakeena reported in (2007) 6 MLJ 488
Meera Thinakaran (Dr.) v. State of Tamil Nadu
Municipal Corpn. of Delhi v. Pramod Kumar Gupta
N.C. Suresh Kumar. V Inspector General of Registration
P.Pandian vs. Inspector General of Registration reported in (2016) 2 LW 273
Shakeena Vs. Bank of India reported in (2021) 12 SCC 761
Shanti Devi L. Singh v. Tax Recovery Officer reported in (1990) 3 SCC 605
Shree Vijayalakshmi Charitable Trust vs. The Sub Registrar reported in 2009 (5) CTC 15
Sale certificates issued under SARFAESI Act are not compulsorily registrable and do not require stamp duty when filed under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act.
Sale certificates issued under SARFAESI Act are not compulsorily registrable and do not require stamp duty when filed under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act.
Stamp duty for Sale Certificates must be calculated based on the purchase price stated in the certificate, not the market value, with total permissible duties capped at specified rates.
Sale certificates issued by banks are not compulsorily registrable and filing them in Book No.1 does not attract stamp duty.
No stamp duty is payable on copies of sale certificates submitted for registration under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, as established by precedent.
A sale certificate issued by a bank does not attract stamp duty at issuance under the Kerala Stamp Act but may do so if registered subsequently.
The liability to pay stamp duty on auction sale certificates is not exempted by procedural errors; legal provisions must be adhered to strictly.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that a sale certificate issued by a Civil or Revenue Officer does not require compulsory registration and should be filed in Book No. 1 as per ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.