Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
Evita Constructions Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector General of Registration – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to refusal of amalgamation registration over stamp duty rate. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. hearing required before deciding stamp duty dispute. (Para 3) |
| 3. direct 2nd respondent to hear and decide on registration. (Para 4) |
C O M M O N O R D E R
These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the impugned refusal check slips dated 25.03.2026, 25.03.2026, 17.03.2026, 25.03.2026 and 17.03.2026, issued by the 3rd respondent refusing to register the order of amalgamation presented by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is liable to pay 7% stamp duty instead of 2% paid by the petitioner. The respondents have treated the amalgamation order as conveyance. However, the petitioner contends that as per the circular issued by the Inspector General of Registration dated 09.09.2024, the petitioner is liable to pay only 2% stamp duty.
2.According to the petitioner, the learned Single Judge of this Court, by an order dated 17.04.2026 passed in W.P.No.17059, 17061 & 19636 of 2024, has held that the deduction in stamp duty will be applicable to amalgamation orders passed by the High Court or the NCLT under Section 233 and Rule 25(5) of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, ac
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
