CANAGASOORIYAM

Vs.

COMMERCIAL LEASING AND FINANCE PLC

SUPREME COURT
FERNANDO, J.
NAWAZ, J.
SAMAYAWARDHENA,J.
SC/APPEAL/23/2021
SC/CHC/LA/85/2020
HC/CIVIL/175/2013/MR
JULY 15, 2021

Stamp duty-Stamp Duty Act, No. 43 of 1982, sections 5(6), 33(1), 71-Stamp Duty (Special Provisions) Act, No. 12 of 2006, section 4(g)-Stamp duty payable on a bond-Fiscal legislation-Strict interpretation

The plaintiff instituted action against the defendant in the Commercial High Court to recover a sum of Rs. 130,819,394.78 with interest on the guarantee/indemnity tendered with the plaint. When this document was sought to be marked in evidence, the defendant objected on the basis that it is a bond which has not been duly stamped and therefore cannot be admitted in evidence. The Commercial High Court allowed the plaintiff to rectify the stamp deficiency, if any. The defendant appealed to the Supreme Court.

Held:

1. According to section 33(1) of the Stamp Duty Act, No. 43 of 1982, no instrument chargeable with stamp duty shall be received or admitted in evidence unless the proper duty and a penalty not exceeding three times the proper duty are paid.

2. The Stamp Duty