Back
2017 Supreme(All) 2513
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
B. Amit Sthalekar, J.
Rail Vihar Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
State of U.P. - Respondent
WRIT-C No. 56686 of 2006
Decided On : 07-09-2017
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ram Niwas Singh, U.P. Singh, Vijay Bahadur Singh
For the Respondent: C.S.C.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the limitation period prescribed in section 47 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, in determining the legality of proceedings for payment of stamp duty.
Headnote:
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Housing Society - Exemption from Stamp Duty
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Housing Society, sought quashing of orders related to payment of stamp duty, claiming exemption based on a government notification issued in 1979. The petitioner's plea of limitation was rejected by the authorities, leading to the initiation of proceedings for payment of stamp duty.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the proceedings were time-barred as they were initiated more than four years after the sale deed, contrary to the provisions of section 47 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The impugned orders were deemed illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, and were quashed. The writ petition was allowed, and any deposited amount towards deficiency of stamp duty was ordered to be refunded to the petitioner.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's claim of exemption from stamp duty based on a government notification, as well as the plea of limitation regarding the initiation of proceedings for payment of stamp duty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of section 47 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, which prescribes a limitation period for initiating proceedings for payment of stamp duty. The court interpreted the factual timeline and concluded that the proceedings were indeed time-barred, leading to the quashing of the impugned orders.
Final Decision: The impugned orders were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. Any deposited amount towards deficiency of stamp duty was ordered to be refunded to the petitioner.
B. Amit Sthalekar, J.
Heard Sri Ram Niwas Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking quashing of the order dated 16.06.2006 passed by respondent no. 2, Board of Revenue, U.P. Camp, Meerut, order dated 20.11.2004 passed by respondent no. 3, Assistant Commissioner, Stamp, Ghaziabad and order dated 15.07.2002, passed by respondent no. 4, Additional Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut arising out of proceedings under section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (the Act, 1899).
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner is a Housing Society registered under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Registration Act, 1965 in the name of Rail Vihar Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. and is engaged in the business of promoting and building of houses. The petitioner purchased land from various persons and with regard to payment of stamp duty its case is that it was not liable for payment of stamp duty as the State Government had issued a notification in 1979 under section 9(1) of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 granting housing societies exemption from payment of stamp duty. Accordingly, the petitioner-society filed Writ Petition No. 12833 of 1991 in which there was an interim order directing the petitioner society to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs. 6 Lacs but subsequently by order dated 06.05.1992 the writ petition was dismissed by a Division Bench of High Court. Thereafter, stamp suit no. 530/99-2000 was instituted for payment of stamp duty in which an order was passed on 11.02.2002 determining the deficiency of stamp duty at Rs. 49,590/- with a direction to the Collector Stamp to determine as to whether the petitioner had deposited the sum of Rs. 6 Lacs and what would be the stamp duty payable and what would be the rate applicable to the residential property since the petitioner was a housing society and the land had been purchased for constructing houses. Upon remand, the stamp authority passed the impugned order dated 20.11.2004 determining the stamp duty as well as deficiency of stamp duty payable by the petitioner-society. Aggrieved by the order dated 20.11.2004, the petitioner preferred stamp appeal, which has been dismissed by the Member, Board of Revenue by its order dated 16.06.2006.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sale deeds were of the year 1991-92 whereas the Stamp Suit No. 530/1999-2000 was initiated by the respondents sometime in the year 2000 and, therefore, the entire proceedings were time barred. He further submits that this plea of limitation was taken by him when the first revisional order was passed and it has been referred to by the revisional authority in its order dated 15.07.2002 but it has been rejected on the ground that cognizance of the case was taken on 21.09.1995 whereas the sale deed was of 15.11.1991 and, therefore, the stamp duty was within the period of four years and therefore, within limitation.
5. In my opinion, this appears to be factually incorrect because the Stamp Suit No. 530/1999-2000 itself was instituted more than seven years after the sale deed.
6. Learned standing counsel submits that there was delay because petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 12833 of 1991 in the High Court.
7. This submission is also not correct for the reason that the Writ Petition No. 12833 of 1991 was dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court on 06.05.1992 and from that date also till the order of 1999, more than 7 years had already passed.
8. In this view of the matter, the proceedings, having been initiated, were beyond the period of four years as prescribed in Sub-Section 3 of section 47 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and therefore, the entire proceedings were barred by limitation.
9. In this view of the matter, the impugned orders dated 16.06.2006 passed by respondent no. 2, Board of Revenue, U.P. Camp, Meerut, order dated 20.11.2004 passed by respondent no. 3, Assistant Commissioner, Sta
