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

2010 Supreme(All) 2324

PANKAJ MITHAL
ASHISH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (STAMP) – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Ramendra Asthana for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—A lease is chargeable to stamp duty under the provision of the Indian Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) in accordance with Article 35 of Schedule 1-B of the Act.

2. Article 35 of the Schedule 1-B of the Act provides for stamp duty on the lease as under:

“35. Lease, including an under-lease or sub-lease and any agreement to let or subject—

(a) where by such lease the rent is fixed and no premium is paid or delivered—

(i) .......

(ii) .......

(iii) ........

(iv) ........

(v) where the lease purports to be for

a term exceeding twenty years but

not exceeding thirty years

(vi) where the lease purports to be for

a term exceeding thirty years or in

perpetuity or does not purport to be

for any definite term

3. Under clause (v) on a lease which purports to be for a term exceeding twenty years but not exceeding thirty years stamp duty as a conveyance for a consideration equal to six times the amount or value of the average annual rent reserved is payable, whereas under clause (vi) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding 30 years or in perpetuity the stamp duty as a conveyance equal to market value of the property which is subject of the lea




















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top