JUDGMENT VIVEK AGARWAL, J. – This writ appeal has been filed by the State being aggrieved by order dated 29-11-2004 passed in W. P. No. 21/2002 by learned Single Judge setting aside the order dated 7-11-2001 passed by the Collector of Stamps, Bhind, and order dated 3-1-2002 passed by the Board of Revenue as Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and consequential demand notices dated 12-11-2001 and 22-12-2001.

2. Brief facts leading to the present appeal are that one company Ceat Ltd. registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 in its annual general meeting convened on 24th March, 1995 resolved to authorize its Board of Directors to sell, lease or otherwise dispose of the whole or substantially the whole of the Tyre Cord Undertaking of the company having its plant at Malanpur near Gwalior in the State of M. P. on such terms and conditions as the Board of Directors of the Company may consider to be in the interest of the company, copy of such resolution is enclosed to the writ appeal as Annexure A.

3. Consequently respondent No. 1 herein SRF Ltd. passed a resolution by the Board of Directors at its meeting held on 29-6-1995 according approval to the acquisition by the company of the Tyre Cord Division (TCD) of Ceat Ltd. located at village Ghirongi, Malanpur, Distt. Bhind (M. P.) as a ‘going concern’ at a consideration of Rs. 325 crores approx.

4. Thereafter a joint resolution was passed by the representatives of the respective companies to confirm that Ceat Ltd. has sold as a ‘going concern’ its Tyre Cord Division (TCD) located at Malanpur Industrial Area, village Ghirongi, Distt. Bhind, near Gwalior, to SRF Ltd. It is further mentioned that the properties, licences, benefits of contracts and various other tangible rights relating to the business of the undertaking stand vested in the SRF immediately after midnight of 8th February, 1996 subject to completion of certain formalities and from such date, the operations of the business of TCD are in the exclusive possession, control and management of SRF.

5. In terms of such resolution respectively passed by Ceat Ltd. and SRF Ltd., a deed of conveyance was executed between the two entities on 13th June, 1996 enclosed herewith as Annexure F. This deed of conveyance dated 13th June, 1996 is the bone of contention in the present litigation. When this deed of conveyance was presented to the Sub-Registrar, then exercising his authority under section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, Sub-Registrar, Gohad, Distt. Bhind, noted vide his report No. 153 dated 2-7-1996 that conveyance deed which has been received in his office on 13-6-1996 for registration is deficiently stamped, and therefore, he confiscated such document exercising authority vested in him under section 33 of the Stamp Act and forwarded the original document to the office of the Collector of Stamps, Bhind.

6. It will not be out of place to mention that Collector of Stamps passed order dated 30-5-1998, Annexure J, mentioning therein that a notice was sent by registered post to the seller, but nobody appeared for them, however, purchaser i.e. SRF Ltd. authorized its representative Shri I. J. Joshi who appeared before the Collector of Stamps on 31-1-1997. Reply furnished by the purchaser company by registered post on 21-1-1997 was taken on record. Thereafter, another reply was filed on 16-10-1997 and thereafter statements of Shri I. J. Joshi, representative of the company, were recorded. On 13-11-1997 SRF filed copies of valuation report and balance sheet of SRF for the year 1996-97 and 1995-96.

7. Sub-Registrar, Gohad, alongwith Sub-Registrar at the headquarters conducted spot inspection and filed their report. On the basis of such document as were produced before the Collector of Stamps, Collector of Stamps passed an order that deed of conveyance which was presented to the Sub-Registrar on 13-6-1996 was containing recitals to transfer properties having market value of 303 crores for which stamp duty payable will be Rs. 25