Upon approval of a resolution plan by the authorized adjudicating forum, all claims not specifically included in the plan are extinguished and become unenforceable against the corporate entity, binding all stakeholders and government authorities.

JUDGMENT :

Hemant M. Prachchhak, J.

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Ms. Nirali Sarda, learned AGP for the respondent waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing today.

2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 challenging the impugned order dated 30.12.2016 passed by the respondent concerning levy of the stamp duty of Rs.1,36,46,243/- and later on affirmed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Gandhinagar vide order dated 10.08.2020 in Stamp Appeal No. 17 of 2017.

3. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, as per the order dated 17.02.2016 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the scheme of amalgamation in respect of Digjam Limited with Digjam Textiles Limited, now known as Digjam Limited has sanctioned the scheme of amalgamation being conveyance so far as it relates to reconstruction or amalgamation of companies by virtue of section 394 of Companies Act, 1956 under Article 20(d) of Schedule-I to the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’). That, the Office of the Superintendent of Stamps, Gandhinagar had issued an order of deficit stamp duty on 30.12.2016 wherein it is stated that Section 2(g) of the Act pertains to the transfer of ownership and in view of the order passed by this Court in the company petition, the case falls under the clause relating to transfer of ownership which is required to be stamped and according to the provision, they have issued the recovery notice and initiated proceedings against the present petitioner and by virtue of the order passed by this Court in the company petition, the company is transferred to the new company. Therefore, by virtue of this conveyance deed the necessary stamp duty is leviable along with the necessary cess and Rs.1,36,46,243/- is to be paid within 90 days and 25% of the said amount is to be deposited within 90 days failing which 15% interest along with the amount of penalty is to be borne by the present petitioner. That, the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs.34,11,561/- being 25% of the amount ordered by the respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority under section 53(1) of the Act wherein the petitioner has stated and explained that the petitioner is not required to pay the amount of deficit stamp duty however, without considering the settled legal principles as enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the impugned order dated 10.08.2020 was passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Gandhinagar.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders dated 30.12.2016 and 10.08.2020 passed by the respondent and the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Gandhinagar respectively, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

5. Heard Mr. Vivek B. Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Sanjay Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Nirali Sarda, learned AGP for the respondent.

6. Mr. Vivek B. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ghanashyam Mishra and Sons Private Limited Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Ors. reported in 2021 (9) SCC 657 and has contended that once the resolution plan is approved by the Adjudic