Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Gita Power and Infrastructure Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Inspector General of Registration cum the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Office of the Inspector General of Registration – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the appellant's withdrawal of registration. (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments against the demand for stamp duty. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's obligation to enforce stamp duty requirements. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 11) |
| 4. final ruling on the appeal. (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Present writ appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 27.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.33963 of 2022. Writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court.
2. The facts in short admitted between parties are that the appellant has presented a document before Sub Registrar/Registering authority for registration on 29.07.2021. It is an assignment agreement. The Registering Authority referred the matter to the District Registrar, Administration, on the ground that the document presented for registration was not sufficiently stamped. The appellant found that the stamp duty is very high and took a decision to take back the document presented for registration. It is not in dispute that the said assignment agreement has been executed between the parties. Since the appellant has taken a decision not to proceed with the registration, an applicatio
The registering authority must impound documents with insufficient stamp duty and cannot return them before determining the proper duty.
The court established that the time taken for stamp duty adjudication is to be excluded from the registration period under the Registration Act, facilitating the registration of documents.
(1) Object of Registration Act is not for securing revenue but maintaining record of documents of title in public interest – Payment of stamp duty under Amnesty Scheme will not have effect of alterin....
Refund of stamp duty is not permissible when the duty has been utilized for a document that was executed but refused registration due to non-compliance with legal provisions.
An agreement for a future lease contingent on construction does not constitute a lease and cannot be impounded for stamp duty until the property exists.
Procedural compliance under Section 33A of the Indian Stamp Act suffices for levy of deficit stamp duty; remedy through appeal is not barred by concurrent writ proceedings.
Failure to comply with registration provisions negates entitlement to refund of stamp duty, as execution of the document fulfills the payment's purpose under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
