HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
GENTARI SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM MALAYSIA – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: WA-24-75-10-2023]
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the novation agreement and initial stamp duty assessment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. issue of ad valorem duty on the novation agreement. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. definition and charging provision of stamp duty applicable. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. test for determining stamp duty on instruments. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. collector's argument regarding the novation agreement as conveyance. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. definition of property under the stamp act. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 7. rights and obligations related to the novation agreement. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 8. effects of novation under contracts act. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 9. nature of novation agreements. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 10. collector's misunderstanding of the novation agreement's nature. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
Introduction
[1] On 24 October 2024, I allowed the originating summons filed by the plaintiff, Gentari Sdn Bhd, against the assessment of stamp duty (ad valorem duty) by the Collector of Stamp Duty ("the Collector") in respect of a Novation Agreement dated 4 August 2023 ("the Novation Agreement"). The Novation Agreement was entered into between Gentari Renewables Sdn Bhd ("GRSB" previously known as Petronas Power Sdn Bhd), Petroliam Nasional Berhad ("Petronas"), and the plaintiff. The stamp duty was assessed pursuant to s 17 and item 32(a) First Schedule of the Stamp Act 1949 to the tune of RM8,220,010.00.
[2] The plaintiff had appealed against the stamp duty imposed by the Collector under s 39(1) of the Stamp Act 1949 by way of this originating summons. I had allowed the appeal as follows:
(a) the assessment of stamp duty imposed in respect of the Novation Agreement was wrong in law;
(b) the stamp duty imposed by the Collector is cancelled; and
(c) the Collector imposes a stamp duty of RM10.00 under item 4 of the First Schedule.
[3] Hereinafter, all sections or schedules referred to in this judgment refer to the Stamp Act 1949 .
Background Facts
[4] This appeal is by way of a case stated. Pursuant to the Novation Agreement, the plaintiff agreed to accept the novation and transfer of Petronas' rights, privileges, title, interest, obligations, and benefits under the shareholders' loan agreement. The consideration under the Novation Agreement is the outstanding loan amount by GRSB to Petronas under the shareholders' loan agreement, amounting to RM151,425,000.00. The Collector assessed stamp duty on an ad valorem basis under item 32(a) First Schedule. Hence, this appeal.
[5] The issue before me is whether the ad valorem duty chargeable under item 32(a) of the First Schedule on the Novation Agreement is correct.
The Law
[6] Item 32(a) of the First Schedule provides for the description of the instrument, ie, conveyance, assignment, transfer, or absolute bill of sale, and the formula to calculate the proper stamp duty, which is as follows:
"On sale of any property (except stock, shares, marketable securities, and accounts receivables or book debts of the kind mentioned in paragraph (c))"
[7] Section 4(1) is the charging provision, which provides that, subject to the Act and exemptions contained therein, the instruments specified in the First Schedule are chargeable with the stipulated duties. The assessing of the stamp duty was pursuant to s 17, which read as follows:
(1) Where any property is transferred:
(a) in consideration, wholly or in part, of any debt or of any stock or marketable security; or
(b) subject, either certainly or contingently, to the payment or transfer of any money or stock, whether being or constituting a charge or incumbrance upon the property or not, the instrument of transfer shall be chargeable with ad valorem duty calculated at the rates specified under Item 32(a) or (aa) in the First Schedule upon either the value of the debt, stock or marketable security, as the case may be, or the market value of the property as on the date of execution, whichever be the greater.
(2) Where the consideration, or any part of the consideration, for a transfer of property consists of any security other th
BASF Services (M) Sdn Bhd v. Pemungut Duti Setem
Pemungut Duit Setem Malaysia v. Perbadanan Pembangunan Pulau Pinang
Puncak Alam Housing Sdn Bhd v. Menta Construction Sdn Bhd & Anor
LYL Hooker Sdn. Bhd. v. Tevanaigam Savisthri K.T. Chitty & Anor
Malaysian International Merchant Bankers Bhd. v. Datuk Mohd. Salleh & Anor
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.