IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, J.
Gyanprakash – Petitioner
Vs.
State of M.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 6254, 6275, 6276, 6277, 6278, 6279, 6280, 6281, 6282, 6283, 6289, 6290, 6291, 6292, 6293, 6294, 6295, 6296, 6297, 6298, 6299, 6300, 6301, 6302, 6303, 6304, 6305, 6306, 6307, 6308, 6309, 6310, 6311, 6312, 6313, 6314, 6315, 6316, 6317, 6318, 6319, 6320, 6321, 6322, 6323, 6324, 7398 of 2012
Decided On : 19-04-2018
Stamp Duty - Property Allotment - Indian Stamp Act, 1899, Section 47-A - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the order of the Collector of Stamps regarding the calculation of stamp duty on a plot allotted by a registered society. The petitioner contended that the stamp duty should be based on the price paid for the plot at the time of allotment and not include the value of the house constructed later.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the relevant date for estimating the market value of the property for stamp duty calculation is the date of execution of the instrument. It also found that the stamp duty should be based on the value of the property subject to transfer in the instrument.
Issues: The issues involved the determination of the relevant date for calculating the property value for stamp duty, and whether the value of the constructed house should be included in the stamp duty calculation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, Section 47-A and relevant case law to establish that the market value for stamp duty is determined based on the date of execution of the instrument and that the stamp duty is payable on the value of the property subject to transfer in the instrument.
Final Decision: The impugned orders of the Collector, Commissioner, and Board of Revenue were set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the Collector of Stamps for a fresh decision in accordance with the law.
1. This order will govern disposal of WP Nos. 6254/12, 6275/12, 6276/12, 6277/12, 6278/12, 6279/12, 6280/12, 6281/12, 6282/12, 6283/12, 6289/12, 6290/12, 6291/12, 6292/12, 6293/12, 6294/12, 6295/12, 6296/12, 6297/12, 6298/12, 6299/12, 6300/12, 6301/12, 6302/12, 6303/12, 6304/12, 6305/12, 6306/12, 6307/12, 6308/12, 6309/12, 6310/12, 6311/12, 6312/12, 6313/12, 6314/12, 6315/12, 6316/12, 6317/12, 6318/12, 6319/12, 6320/12, 6321/12, 6322/12, 6323/12, 6324/12 & 7398/12, since it is jointly stated by counsel for the parties that all writ petitions involve same issue in identical facts situation.
2. For convenience the facts have been noted from WP No. 6254/2012.
3. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner challenging the order dated 31st August 2010 passed by Collector of Stamps as affirmed by order dated 1/2/2011 in appeal by the Commissioner and the order dated 18th January 2012 in Second appeal by board of revenue.
4. The case of petitioner is that petitioner was allotted plot no. 1498 Sudama Nagar Indore by respondent no. 4 in the year 1984 which is a registered society. The area of plot is 30 X 50 =1500 sq.ft. and price paid by petitioner was Rs. 11,001/-. Further case of petitioner is that after allotment of plot, the petitioner himself constructed house thereon in the year 1985 and on account of some legal complications, the registered instrument in respect of plot was not executed by the society and after obtaining permission for registration by respondent no. 4 society the instrument for registration was executed on 10/11/2009. But the Registrar had taken objection that value of the property was not correctly stated in the instrument therefore, the matter was referred to the Collector of Stamps under Section 47-A of Indian Stamp Act. The Collector of Stamps vide order dated 31st August 2010 has held that the stamp duty will be calculated on the basis of value of the plot and construction raised thereon and has further held that market value will be determined in reference to the date of execution of instrument. Accordingly the Collector of Stamp determined the market value at Rs. 16,81,000/- and treating construction to be more than 20 years old granted 10% exemption and calculated the stamp duty of Rs. 1,59,695/- and after deducting the stamp duty of Rs. 1050 already paid, he demanded the balance stamp duty of Rs. 1,58,645/-.
5. The first appeal preferred by petitioner has been dismissed by the Commissioner vide order dated 1/2/2011 by affirming the order of Collector of Stamp and second appeal has also been dismissed by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 18th January 2012.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that stamp duty is payable on the value of the property as on the date of allotment i.e. the price paid by petitioner to the society. He further submits that petitioner himself has constructed the house after allotment of plot therefore, value of the house cannot be taken into account for the purpose of calculating stamp duty. He has further submitted that identical writ petition being WP No. 1556/06 has already been decided by this court vide order dated 15/1/2008 and said writ petitioner has been held liable to pay the stamp duty on the basis of price paid to the society for allotment of plot.
7. As against this learned counsel for respondents have supported the impugned orders.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of the record it is noticed that the first issue raised by petitioner relates to determination of relevant date for calculating the value of the property for the purpose of payment of stamp duty.
9. The contention of counsel for petitioner is that the date of allotment of plot in the year 1984 is the relevant date whereas the contention of respondent is that date of execution of instrument i.e. 10/11/09 is the relevant date for ascertaining the market value.
10. Explanation to Section 47A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 inserted by MP Act 30 of 1997 w.e.f. 15/11/1997 in c
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.