High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
N.D. Ojha, C.J. and K.K. Adhikari, J.
Ramkishori Gupta
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh
MISC. PETN. 1769 of 1986 Of
Decided On : Aug 14,1987
It is apparent that in the exercise of powers conferred on it by Entry 63 of List II and Entry 44 of List III, it was Open to the State Legislature not only to make an amendment in the Act in regard to the rates of stamp duty but also in regard to the mode of computation of stamp duty. In other words, it was open to the State Legislature to lay down that the basis for computing stamp duty shall not be the amount or value of the consideration for the conveyance as set forth therein but it shall be the market value of the property which is the subject matter of conveyance.
AIR 1972 SC 899, AIR 1962 SC 1044, AIR 1987 SC 27 and AIR 1973 SC 231 followed. AIR 1974 Mad. 117 relied on. (Para 3
(2) Stamp Act, 1899-S.47-A [as inserted by M.P. (Amendment) Act No.8 of 1975]-is not ultra vires-guide lines of State Government-not conclusive.
AIR 1952 SC 16 referred to. [Para 5
(3) Constitution of India-Arts. 226 and 227-writ petition under-allernative remedy of appeal should be exhausted first.
AIR 1983 SC 603 and AIR 1985 SC 330 followed. [Para 6
(4) Limitation Act, 1963-S.14-time spent in writ petition-should be condoned ill proceeding for availing alternative remedies.
AIR 1986 SC 987 followed. [Para 6
( 1. ) THIS order shall govern the disposal of Misc. Petition No. 3390 of 1986, Misc. Petition No. 3521 of 1986 and Misc. Petition 3637 of 1986 also. In all these writ petitions the validity of certain amendments made in the Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by M. P. Act No. 8 of 1975 has been challenged. To be specific, the amendments that have been made in Section 27 and Schedule 1 of the Act and Section 47-A as inserted in the Ad by the aforesaid amendment Act No. 8 of 197,s are sought to be declared ultra vires. Section 27 of the Act after its amendment by M. P. Act No. 8 of 1975 reads as hereunder :
"27. Facts affecting duty to be set forth in instrument -- (1) The consideration, if any, the market value of the property and all other facts and circumstances affecting the chargeability of any instrument with duty or the amount of the duty with which it is chargeable, shall be fully and truly set-forth therein. (2) In the case of instruments relating to immovable property chargeable with an ad valorem duty on the market value of the property, and not on the value set forth, the instrument shall fully and truly set forth the annual land revenue in the case of other immovable property, the local rates, municipal or other taxes, if any, to which such property may be subject, and any other particulars which may be prescribed by rules made under this Act. "
S. 47-A, on the other hand, which has been inserted by M. P. Act No. 8 1975 is to the following effect:
"47-A. Instruments undervalued how to be dealt with -- (1) If the registering officers appointed under the Registration Act, 1908 (No. XVI of 1908) while registering any instrument has reason to believe that the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may, after registering such instrument, refer the same to the Collector for determination of market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon. (2) On receipt of a reference under Sub-section (1), the Collector shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding an enquiry in such manner, as may be prescribed, determine the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument and the duty as aforesaid. The difference, if any, in the amount of duty shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty. (3) The Collector may suo motu, within five years from the date of registration of any instrument not already referred to him under Sub-section (1), call for and examine the instrument for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the correctness of the market value of the property which is the subject matter of any such instrument and the duty payable thereon and if after such examination, he has reason to believe that the market value of such property has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may determine the market value of such property and the duty as aforesaid in accordance with the procedure provided for in sub-sec. (2 ). The difference, if any, in the amount of duty, shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty. Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any instrument registered prior to the date of the commencement of the Indian Stamp (Madhya Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1975. (4) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Collector under sub-sec. (2) or sub-sec. (3) may in the prescribed manner appeal against such order to the Commissioner of the division. (5) Any person aggrieved by an order passed in appeal under sub-sec. (4) may in the prescribed manner appeal against such an order to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Madhya Pradesh. (6) Every first and second appeal shall be filed within thirty days from the date of the communication of the order against which the appeal is filed, along with a certified copy of the order to which objection is made and shall be presented and verified in such manner as may b
State of Tamil Nadu v. T.N. Chandrasekharan
COMISSIONER OF POLICE,BOMBAY Vs Gordhandas Bhanji
CALCUTTA GAS COMPANY Vs State of West Bengal
HIMALAYA HOUSE COMPANY LIMITED,BOMBAY Vs CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY
BAR COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs State of Uttar Pradesh
TITAGHUR PAPER MILLS COMPANY LIMITED Vs STATE OF orissa
ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE,CHANDAN NAGAR,WEST BENGAL Vs DUNLOP INDIA LIMITED
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.