Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Ultratech Cement Ltd A Company ... vs The State Of M.P. on 12 August, 2024
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G.S. Ahluwalia
1 W.P. No.18026/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 12TH OF AUGUST, 2024
WRIT PETITION No.18026 of 2020
M/S ULTRATECH CEMENT LIMITED AND ANOTHER
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri P.Chidambaram - Senior Advocate with Shri Ashish Prasad, Shri
Pruthvi Dhinoja, Ms.Mukta Dutta and Shri Eijaz Siddiqui - Advocates
for the petitioners.
Shri Prashant Singh - Advocate General with Shri Harpreet Singh
Ruprah - Additional Advocate General and Shri Amit Seth - Deputy
Advocate General for the respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
"Reserved on : 08/08/2024"
"Pronounced on : 12/08/2024"
.........................................................................................................
ORDER
This petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following relief(s) :
7.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order and direction :
a. to quash the impugned order dated 24-10-2020 (Annexure-P/22) passed by the Respondent being illegal arbitrary and exorbitant; b. to hold that the Petitioner is not liable to pay stamp duty on the order of NCLT Allahabad dated 2-3-2017 in view of the express statutory provision contained in the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (as applicable to State of M.P.) ; c. That, any other relief deemed fit in the facts and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 2 W.P. No.18026/2020 circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.
2. It is submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner, that at the time of admission of this writ petition, a preliminary objection was raised by the Respondents with regard to alternative remedy and the Co-ordinate Bench by order dated 25-11-2020, has rejected the preliminary objection. The Petitioner No.1 is a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act. The Petitioner No.1 is the part of conglomerate Aditya Birla Group.
3. The State of M.P., by notification bearing No.F.8-429-2014- 2V(01) dated 2-1-2015 issued under Section 9(1)(a) of the Indian Stamp Act, inserted a table of reduced rates in relation to the existing Schedule 1-A of the Indian Stamp Act (as applicable in State of M.P.). By Indian Stamp (Madhya Pradesh) Amendment Act, 2014 dated 7-1-2015, a new Schedule 1-A was substituted for the previously operational Schedule 1- A. Further by Notification dated 16-4-2015, by exercising power conferred under Section 9(1)(a) of Indian Stamp Act, the State Government amended January 2015 reduced rates and substituted Rs. 10 Cr. with Rs. 25 Cr. in Sr. No. 4 of Article 25 of Indian Stamp Act.
4. In the year 2016, the Petitioner No.1 entered into definitive arrangements with M/s Jai Prakash Associates (JAL) and M/s Jaypee Cement Corporation Limited (JCCL) for acquiring amongst others, the JAL Bela Cement Plant at Rewa and JAL Sidhi Cement Plant at Sidhi situated in State of Madhya Pradesh. On 15-2-2017, NCLT Mumbai Bench vide its order passed in B.H.C. Company Scheme Pattern No. 881 of 2016, sanctioned Scheme of Arrangement between the Petitioner, JAL and JCCL. NCLT Mumbai specifically ordered the Petitioner to lodge the copy of order of NCLT Mumbai along with sanctioned Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 3 W.P. No.18026/2020 scheme with Superintendent of Stamps, for the purpose of adjudication of stamp duty within 60 days from the date of receipt of order.
5. Similarly, the NCLT-Allahabad Bench vide its order dated 2-3- 2017 passed in Company Petition No.49 of 2016, sanctioned the scheme of Arrangement between the Petitioner, JAL and JCCL.
6. Accordingly, the Petitioner No.1 acquired the identified Cement Plants of JAL and JCCL situated in the State of Madhya Pradesh, State of Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand as a going concern. The Petitioner no.1 filed an application before Superintendent of Stamps, Mumbai. The Board of Directors of the Petitioner No.1, JAL and JCCL in a meeting decided to make the scheme of arrangement effective from 29-6-2017.
7. It is submitted that vide notification dated 3rd of July 2017, the stamp duty chargeable on "instrument" under proviso (a) of Article 25 of Stamp Schedule 1-A was capped to maximum amount of Rs. 25 crores. The Mudra Zila Adhikari (Court of Collector of Stamps/Revenue), Mumbai issued an order dated 4-10-2017 demanding stamp duty of Rs. 32,37 cr. which was paid by Petitioner no. 1 on 1-11- 2017.
8. With a view to seek relaxation in payment of Stamp Duty, the Petitioner No.1 wrote a letter dated 24-10-2017, to the Principal Secretary, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh, Department of Commercial Tax, Bhopal regarding chargeability of stamp duty on the NCLT/Scheme of Arrangement as per notification dated 3-7-2017. The Petitioner also made a representation to the Chief Minister on 19-7-2018 seeking his intervention in the matter of imposition of Janpad Cess @ 1% on the sale value of property subject to the instrument under Section 75 of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 4 W.P. No.18026/2020 M.P. Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993. The representation made by the Petitioner No.1 was accepted by the Panchayat and Rural Development Department and vide its order dated 6-10-2018 directed that Janpad Cess was to be collected @ 1% of the Stamp Duty from the Petitioner and not on the value of the assets.
9. On 30-7-2019, the Registration Office, Sidhi directed the Petitioner No.1 to submit the copy of the orders passed by NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad Bench pursuant to which, the Petitioner No.1 had taken over the assets of JAL. In reply to such notice, on 5-8-2019, the Petitioner No.1 submitted a copy of : (a) order dated 15-2-2017 passed by NCLT, Mumbai; (b) Order dated 2-3-2017 passed by NCLT Allahabad; (c) Receipt of Payment of Stamp Duty by Mumbai; (d) From No. INC 28 submitted to Registrar of companies.
10. Vide notification dated 25-8-2020, published in the official gazette, the State Govt. directed that, from the Petitioner No.1, Janpad Cess shall be collected @ 1% of the stamp duty instead of value of the property.
11. The DIG, Registration Jabalpur issued a letter dated 23-1-2020 to the Registration Office, Sidhi directing to recover Stamp Duty on the order of NCLT Allahabad dated 2-3-2017 as per Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act. In pursuance to the aforesaid letter, a notice dated 24-2- 2020 was issued by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi under Section 48-B read with Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act, directing the Petitioner No.1 to produce the original copy of order of NCLT Allahabad i.e., instrument, failing which it shall be presumed that the original instrument has not been properly stamped and proceedings will be initiated under Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 5 W.P. No.18026/202012. The Petitioner No.1 filed its preliminary reply on 27-3-2020 and apart from other grounds, also pleaded specifically that the original order of NCLT Allahabad cannot be produced. Thereafter, the Petitioner No.1 further filed its detailed reply on 27-7-2020, claiming that it has no liability to pay Stamp Duty as it has already paid in Mumbai. In the alternative it was pleaded that in view of notification dated 3-7-2017, the Petitioner No.1 is only liable to pay Rs. 25 cr. as a cap has been imposed on the stamp duty. Again on 11-9-2020, the Collector Stamps, Sidhi issued a notice dated 11-9-2020 under Section 48-B read with Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act, thereby directing the petitioner to produce the original order of NCLT Allahabad, otherwise, it shall be presumed that the original instrument has not been properly stamped and the proceedings shall be initiated under Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act.
13. On 16-10-2020, Petitioner No.1 filed an application before Collector of Stamps, Bulandshahar (U.P.) for adjudication of stamp duty on the order passed by NCLT, Allahabad and by filing an application dated 19-10-2020, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi was requested to stay its proceedings, till the matter is finally adjudicated by Collector of Stamps, Bulandshahar (U.P.).
14. However, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi passed the impugned order dated 24-10-2020 demanding a total amount of Rs.297,65,68,621/- under the following heads :
a. Stamp Duty of Rs.123,05,32,500/- @ 5% on immovable assets;
b. Stamp Duty of Rs.6,13,460/- @ 1% on immovable assets; c. Upkar Cess of Rs.12,30,53,250/- @ 10% on Stamp Duty;Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 6 W.P. No.18026/2020
d. Janpad Cess of Rs. 24,61,05,500/- @ 1% of the value of Immovable assets;
e. Penalty of Rs. 137,62,62,911/- @ 2% for 43 months.
15. Challenging the impugned order passed by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi, it is submitted by Counsel for Petitioners, that as per the provisions of Section 3(bb),19-A of Indian Stamp Act, the instrument would be chargeable on the date when it is "received" in State of Madhya Pradesh. In the present case, although the Petitioner had earlier claimed that the instrument i.e., order dated 2-3-2017 passed by NCLT Allahabad was brought in State of M.P. on 24-10-2017, but in fact it was "received" in M.P. on 5-8-2019. Therefore, in view of notification dated 3-7-2017, the Petitioners were required to pay Rs. 25 Cr.s only as the maximum cap of Rs.25 Crores as provided in notification dated 3-7- 2017. Similarly, in view of the notifications dated 6-10-2018 and 25-8- 2020, the Janpad Cess @ 1% was chargeable on stamp duty and not on the value of the assets. Since, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi had not initiated any proceedings under Section 33 and 38 of Indian Stamps Act, therefore, should not have imposed any penalty. It is further submitted that the principles of Natural Justice were violated, thereby causing serious prejudice to the Petitioner because the show cause notice which was given to the petitioner No.1 only spoke about filing of original instrument, failing which a presumption shall be drawn that the original instrument is not properly stamped and proceedings under Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act would be initiated. It is submitted that in fact, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi had instructed the Petitioner to perform an impossible act because the order of the NCLT Allahabad was in the file of the case, and could not have been produced by the Petitioner No.1.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 7 W.P. No.18026/2020Further more, the stamp duty is payable on instrument when it is received in Madhya Pradesh and not on the date of passing of order by NCLT Allahabad. It is further submitted that the matter may be remanded back so that the Petitioners can put forward their case in more effective manner. It is further submitted that as per Proviso to Article 25, 5% of Stamp Duty was payable only on immovable Assets, but the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has also imposed 1% on movable assets. To buttress his contentions, the Counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon the Judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Lever and Another Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another reported in (2004) 9 SCC 438 and New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. and others Vs. State of West Bengal and others reported in AIR 1963 SC 1307.
16. Per contra, it is submitted by Counsel for State that the petitioner has an efficacious and alternative remedy. The petitioners are challenging the impugned order on the ground that exorbitant stamp duty has been charged whereas the said ground cannot be said to be jurisdictional issue. Further, the provision of Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act is not applicable. The Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has passed a well reasoned order and the stamp duty is payable as on the date of execution of instrument and not on the date when it is received in the State of M.P. The Petitioners have changed their stand from time to time as per their convenience and with malafide intentions. Even otherwise, on 29-6-2017, four documents were got registered by the Petitioners in Sidhi therefore, the crucial date of bringing the instrument within the State of M.P. would be 29-6-2017 and not 24-10-2017 or 5-8-2019 as claimed by the Petitioner. (Here it is not out of place to mention here that neither the nature of documents has been clarified by the State Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 8 W.P. No.18026/2020 nor a copy of the same has been placed on record). It is submitted that since, the notification dated 3-7-2017 came into force after the receipt of instrument in State of M.P. i.e., 29-6-2017, therefore, the provision of maximum cap of Rs.25 Cr. would not apply and the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has passed the correct order. It is further submitted that the State of M.P. by notification dated 2-1-2015 issued in exercise of Power under Section 9(1)(a) has fixed the rate of stamp duty of 1% on movable assets. To buttress his contentions, the Counsel for the Respondents has relied upon the Judgments passed by Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh Samiti and others reported in (2008) 12 SCC 675, Judgment passed by Allahabad High Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and others reported in AIR 2007 All 39 and Full Bench of Rajasthan High Court in the case of Nanga Vs. Dhannalal reported in 1961 SCC OnLine Raj 38.
17. In reply, it is submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner that although the crucial date is 5-8-2019 on which the instrument was received in State of M.P., but even if it is presumed that the crucial date is 24-10- 2017, still the maximum cap Rs.25 cr. would be available to the Petitioner. Further it is fairly conceded that since, the stamp duty was paid by the Petitioners in U.P., subsequent to the impugned order passed by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi, therefore in the light of Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act, the petitioners are not entitled for adjustment of stamp duty paid by them in Uttar Pradesh. Similarly, it was conceded that in view of Proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 4 of Indian Stamp Act, the Petitioners cannot seek Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 9 W.P. No.18026/2020 adjustment of stamp duty paid by them in Mumbai. Therefore, it was conceded that the Petitioners would not seek adjustment of stamp duty paid by them either in Mumbai or Bulandshahar (U.P.). It is further submitted that if certain aspects, which should not have been taken into consideration by the officer were taken into consideration, then it cannot be said that there was any determination and if the order is passed in excess of its jurisdiction would be a nullity. Therefore, it cannot be said that no jurisdictional issue is involved in the present case. To buttress his contentions, the Counsel for the Petitioner has also relied upon the judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarachand Gupta and Bros, reported in (1971) 1 SCC 486. In response to documents registered on 29-6-2017, it is submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner that Mining Lease Transfer deeds were executed between the Petitioner No.1 and JAL.
18. In reply, it was once again submitted by the Counsel for the Respondent that the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has passed a well reasoned order which does not require any interference.
19. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Whether the Petitioner has an efficacious and alternative remedy and whether this objection can be considered in the light of order dated 25-11-2020 passed by this Court?
20. It is submitted by Counsel for the respondent that the Petitioner has an efficacious and alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 40(1)(d) of Indian Stamp Act and thereafter has a further remedy of filing a revision under Section 56 of Indian Stamp Act. It is further submitted that since, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the Stamp duty assessed by Collector of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 10 W.P. No.18026/2020 Stamps, Sidhi is exorbitant, therefore, the appeal should have been preferred.
21. In reply, it is submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner, that the objection of alternative remedy has already been rejected by this Court by order dated 25-11-2020. Further more, since, question of Jurisdiction and Law are required, therefore, the alternative remedy is not efficacious remedy.
22. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for the Parties on the question of alternative remedy.
23. This Court by order dated 25-11-2020, had passed the following order :
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Objection raised by the learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the State is overruled. This Court has discretion to entertain a writ petition despite availability of alternative remedy when question of jurisdiction of authority, violation of natural justice and fundamental rights are raised in writ petition. Petitioner has raised question of jurisdiction and law, therefore, writ petition is admitted for hearing.
24. The moot question for consideration is that whether the principle of res-judicata is applicable to the interlocutory orders or not?
25. The question is no more res-integra.
26. The Supreme Court in the case of Prahlad Singh v. Col. Sukhdev Singh, reported in (1987) 1 SCC 727 has held as under :
"In Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorajin Debi this Court said:
"The principle of res judicata applies also as between two stages in the same litigation to this extent that a court, whether the trial court or a higher court having at an earlier stage decided a matter in Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 11 W.P. No.18026/2020 one way will not allow the parties to reagitate the matter again at a subsequent stage of the same proceedings."
27. The Supreme Court in the case of C.V. Rajendran and Another v. N.M. Muhammed Kunhi, reported in (2002) 7 SCC 447 has held as under :
"6............The principle of res judicata applies as between two stages in the same litigation so that if an issue has been decided at an earlier stage against a party, it cannot be allowed to be reagitated by him at a subsequent stage in the same suit or proceedings. This position is laid down in Hope Plantations Ltd. v. Taluk Land Board to which one of us (Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.) was a party."
28. The Supreme Court in the case of Shanmughasundaram v. Diravia Nadar, reported in (2005) 10 SCC 728 has held as under :
"23. Unfortunately, for the appellant, the second ground of invalidity of the first award was not expressly challenged in the appeal preferred to the High Court against the order setting aside the said award. The High Court has confirmed judgment of the civil court setting aside the first award and the same has attained finality. It would operate as res judicata between the parties. See the following observations in Satyadhyan v. Deorajin Debi:
The principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving a finality to judicial decisions. What it says is that once a res is judicata, it shall not be adjudged again. Primarily it applies as between past litigation and future litigation. When a matter -- whether on a question of fact or on a question of law -- has been decided between two parties in one suit or proceeding and the decision is final, either because no appeal was taken to a higher Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 12 W.P. No.18026/2020 court or because the appeal was dismissed, or no appeal lies, neither party will be allowed in a future suit or proceeding between the same parties to canvass the matter again. This principle of res judicata is embodied in relation to suits in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure; but even where Section 11 does not apply, the principle of res judicata has been applied by courts for the purpose of achieving finality in litigation. The result of this is that the original court as well as any higher court must in any future litigation proceed on the basis that the previous decision was correct. (SCR p. 594) The principle of res judicata applies also as between two stages in the same litigation to this extent that a court, whether the trial court or a higher court having at an earlier stage decided a matter in one way will not allow the parties to reagitate the matter again at a subsequent stage of the same proceedings. (SCR p. 594) But an interlocutory order which had not been appealed from either because no appeal lay or even though an appeal lay an appeal was not taken can be challenged in an appeal from the final decree or order.
(SCR p. 600)"
29. Since, the respondents did not challenge the order dated 25-11- 2020, therefore, the principle of Res-Judicata would apply and the respondents cannot re-agitate the question of alternative remedy in the same proceedings. Therefore, the preliminary objection with regard to availability of alternative remedy is hereby rejected. What was the very genesis for starting the proceedings and its effect?
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 13 W.P. No.18026/202030. The Collector of Stamps, Sidhi by letter dated 30-7-2019, directed the Petitioner No.1 to submit copies of Orders passed by the NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad pursuant to which it has taken over the unit of JAL located at Bela Distt. Rewa and at Baghawar Distt. Sidhi. By reply dated 5-8-2019, the orders of NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad were submitted by the Petitioner No.1.Thereafter, DIG, registration by his letter dated 23-1-2020 written to the Registration Office, Sidhi, directed to recover stamp duty on the order of NCLT, Allahabad as per Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act. Accordingly, a show cause notice under Section 48-B of Indian Stamp Act was issued to Petitioner No.1 on 24- 2-2020, thereby directing it to produce the original instrument, failing which it shall be presumed that the original instrument is not properly stamped. The Petitioner No.1 filed its reply to this show cause notice, and pleaded that since, the original instrument i.e., order dated 2-3-2017 is in the file of the NCLT Allahabad therefore, it is not possible for it to produce the original one. Thereafter, by drawing inference as provided under Section 48-B of Indian Stamp Act, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi proceeded further under Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act.
31. Thus, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi had directed the Petitioner No.1 to do something which was impossible.
32. However, it is submitted by Counsel for the respondents that as per the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 ( In short Rules 2016), the Petitioner No.1 could have produced the certified copy of order dated 2-3-2017, but only a photo copy was produced. Therefore, it is submitted that the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi did not commit any mistake by drawing a presumption that the original instrument is not properly stamped.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 14 W.P. No.18026/202033. The aforesaid submission made by Counsel for respondent cannot be accepted.
34. Rule 2(10) of Rules 2016 reads as under :
"Certified by Tribunal" means in relation to a copy of a document, certified to be a true copy issued by the Registry or of a Bench of the Tribunal under its hand and seal and as provided in Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act.
35. Section 77 of Indian Evidence Act reads as under :
Proof of documents by production of certified copies - Such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public document or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies.
36. Thus, it is clear that the certified copy of an instrument i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad would have proved the contents of the said document only, but for the purposes of stamp duty, it would not have any relevance, because the chargeable stamp duty is to be ascertained by Collector of Stamps. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion, that the very genesis for initiating the proceedings by issuing show cause notice dated 24-2-2020 was based on incorrect facts and is bad in law for the reasons that the Petitioner No.1 was directed to do something which was impossible.
37. However, the moot question for consideration is that whether the aforesaid illegality committed by Collector of Stamps would vitiate the entire proceedings including the impugned order dated 24-10-2020 or not?
38. The impugned order is primarily based on interpretation of law. According to Collector of Stamps, Sidhi, the instrument became chargeable on the date of execution i.e., 2-3-2017, whereas it is the case Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 15 W.P. No.18026/2020 of the Petitioners that the instrument is chargeable on the date when it is "received" in State of Madhya Pradesh. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion, that so far as the interpretation of law is concerned, the vague Show Cause Notice will not have any adverse effect. Therefore, this Court would like to proceed further to decide that "which date is relevant for making an instrument chargeable in State of Madhya Pradesh, i.e., whether the date on which the instrument was executed in State of Uttar Pradesh or the date on which the instrument was received in Madhya Pradesh".
39. Before considering the submissions made by Counsel for the parties, this Court would like to consider law relating to interpretation of fiscal laws. The Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Another v. V.V.F. Limited and Another, reported in (2020) 20 SCC 57 has held as under :
Case law on "interpretation of fiscal statutes"
23.5. In R.K. Garg v. Union of India, this Court observed and held as follows : (SCC p. 691, para 8) "8. ... The Court must always remember that 'legislation is directed to practical problems, that the economic mechanism is highly sensitive and complex, that many problems are singular and contingent, that laws are not abstract propositions and do not relate to abstract units and are not to be measured by abstract symmetry'; 'that exact wisdom and nice adaption of remedy are not always possible' and that 'judgment is largely a prophecy based on meagre and uninterpreted experience'. Every legislation particularly in economic matters is essentially empiric and it is based on experimentation or what one may call trial and error method and therefore it cannot provide for all possible situations or anticipate all possible abuses. There may be crudities and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 16 W.P. No.18026/2020 inequities in complicated experimental economic legislation but on that account alone it cannot be struck down as invalid. The courts cannot, as pointed out by the United States Supreme Court in Secy. of Agriculture v. Central Roig Refining Co. be converted into tribunals for relief from such crudities and inequities. There may even be possibilities of abuse, but that too cannot of itself be a ground for invalidating the legislation, because it is not possible for any legislature to anticipate as if by some divine prescience, distortions and abuses of its legislation which may be made by those subject to its provisions and to provide against such distortions and abuses. Indeed, howsoever great may be the care bestowed on its framing, it is difficult to conceive of a legislation which is not capable of being abused by perverted human ingenuity. The Court must, therefore, adjudge the constitutionality of such legislation by the generality of its provisions and not by its crudities or inequities or by the possibilities of abuse of any of its provisions. If any crudities, inequities or possibilities of abuse come to light, the legislature can always step in and enact suitable amendatory legislation. That is the essence of pragmatic approach which must guide and inspire the legislature in dealing with complex economic issues."
23.6. In Commr. of Customs v. Dilip Kumar & Co., after considering various decisions on the interpretation of fiscal statutes, it is ultimately concluded that every taxing statute including, charging, computation and exemption clauses, at the threshold stage should be interpreted strictly. Further, though in case of ambiguity in charging provisions, the benefit necessarily goes in favour of the assessee, but for an exemption notification or exemption clause the benefit of ambiguity must be strictly interpreted in favour of the Revenue/State. It is further observed and held that a person claiming exemption, therefore, has to establish that his case Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 17 W.P. No.18026/2020 squarely falls within the exemption notification, and while doing so, a notification should be construed against the assessee in case of ambiguity. A person who claims exemption has to establish his case.
40. Thus, the submissions made by the Counsel for the parties shall be considered in the light of the law relating to interpretation of fiscal laws.
41. For effective determination of the case in hand, the following dates are necessary :
S.No. Date Particulars
1. 2016 Definitive arrangements between
Petitioner No.1 and (JAL) and (JCCL)
2. 15-2-2017 NCLT Mumbai sanctioned the scheme of arrangement between Petitioner No.1, JAL and JCCL
3. 3-2-2017 NCLT Allahabad sanctioned the scheme of arrangement between Petitioner No.1, JAL and JCCL
4. 13-4-2017 Petitioner No.1 filed application before Superintendent of Stamps, Mumbai for adjudication of stamp duty on order passed by NCLT Mumbai.
5. 29-6-2017 The Scheme of arrangement became effective
6. 29-6-2017 Four documents were got registered at Sidhi which were executed between Petitioner No.1 and JAL. However, the State has not disclosed the nature Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 18 W.P. No.18026/2020 of these four documents, but according to the Petitioners, they were Mining Lease Transfer Deeds.
7. 3-7-2017 Notification was issued by State Govt.
under Section 9(1)(a) of Indian Stamp Act, 1899, thereby amending the stamp duty chargeable on the instruments under proviso (a) of Article 25 of Stamp Schedule 1A and made it subject to a maximum of 25 crores.
8. 4-10-2017 Collector of Stamps, Mumbai ascertained the stamp duty on order of NCLT Mumbai as Rs. 32.37 crores
9. 24-10-2017 Petitioner No.1 approached the Principal Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax, State of M.P.
10. 1-11-2017 Petitioner No.1 deposited Rs.
32,37,50,000/- pursuant to order issued by Collector of Stamps, Mumbai
11. 6-10-2018 It was directed by State of M.P., that Janapd Cess is to be collected @ 1% of the Stamp Duty from the Petitioner
12. 30-7-2019 Office of District Registrar, Distt. Sidhi directed the Petitioner to submit copies of orders passed by NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 19 W.P. No.18026/2020
13. 5-8-2019 Petitioner No.1 submitted the copies of the orders of NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad along with other documents
14. 23-1-2020 DIG Registration directed Registration Office, Sidhi to recover Stamp Duty on the order dated 2-3-2017 issued by NCLT Allahabad
15. 24-2-2020 Notice was issued to Petitioner No.1 to produce the original copy of Order passed by NCLT Allahabad
16. 5-8-2020 Reply was filed
17. 25-8-2020 State Govt. issued Notification directing collection of Janpad Cess @ 1% of the Stamp Duty
18. 14-10-2020 Petitioner No.1 filed an application before Collector of Stamps, Bulandshahar for adjudication of stamp duty on order of NCLT Allahabad
19. 24-10-2020 Impugned order was passed by Collector of Stamps, Sidhi
20. 31-3-2021 Collector of Stamps, Bulandshahar passed an assessment order thereby ascertaining that payable stamp duty is Rs. 92,50,00,000/- and after adjusting the stamp duty of Rs. 32,37,50,000/- paid by the Petitioner No. 1 in pursuance Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 20 W.P. No.18026/2020 of order of Collector of Stamps, Mumbai, directed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 60,12,50,000/-
Whether order dated 2-3-2017 passed by NCLT Allahabad is an instrument?
42. The Counsel for the Petitioner as well as the Counsel for the respondent submitted that order dated 2-3-2017 passed by NCLT Allahabad is an instrument. Although there was a consensus on this issue, still this Court would like to refer to Judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Lever (Supra) in which ithas been held as under :
"19. Orders passed by the court resulting in transferring the rights in property have been subjected to levy of stamp duty in several situations. It is there from the date of the inception of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Section 2(m) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 defines "instrument of partition" to mean any instrument whereby co-owners of any property divide or agree to divide such property in severalty, and includes also a final order for effecting a partition passed by any Revenue Authority or any civil court and an award by an arbitrator directing a partition. This provision specifically provides that any final order effecting partition by any court, Revenue Authority or award made by the arbitrator directing partition would be an instrument of partition.
20. This Court in Purshottam H. Judye v. V.B. Potdar considered as to whether an award made by the Industrial Tribunal could be considered as an instrument. After considering the relevant provisions of the law it was held that the word "instrument"
would include awards made by the Industrial Tribunal.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 21 W.P. No.18026/202021. The case of IRC v. G. Angus & Co.considered as to what interpretation has to be placed upon the expression "conveyance on sale" with regard to Section 70 of the Stamp Act, 1899 and held:
"The term conveyance on sale includes every instrument and every decree or order of any court or of any commissioners, whereby any property upon the sale thereof is legally or equitably transferred to or vested in the purchaser or any other person on his behalf or by his direction."
22. The Court held that the thing which is made liable to stamp duty is the "instrument". It is not a transaction of purchase and sale, which is struck at, it is the "instrument" whereby the purchase and sale are effected which is struck at. It is the "instrument" whereby any property upon the sale thereof is legally or equitably transferred and the taxation is confined only to the instrument whereby the property is transferred. If a contract of purchase or sale or a conveyance by way of purchase and sale, can be, or is, carried out without an instrument, the case would not fall within the section and no tax can be imposed. Taxation is confined to the instrument by which the property is transferred legally and equitably transferred.
23. Point as to whether the stamp duty was leviable on the court order sanctioning the scheme of amalgamation was considered at length in Sun Alliance Insurance Ltd. v. IRC. On the point which arose for determination as to whether the stamp duty was payable on the order of the Judge sanctioning the scheme of arrangement under Section 206 of the Companies Act, it was held: (All ER p. 142d-f) "It follows that it is the court order that effects the transfer; and this is nonetheless so because the scheme is not operative until an office copy has been delivered to the Registrar of Companies for registration, for the court order itself ordered that to be done and the Act so Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 22 W.P. No.18026/2020 provides; nor because London has still to cause the name of Sun Alliance to be entered on to the register as the holder of the shares. The registration of the transferee occurs in every case where a transfer is executed, and merely perfects the title of the transferee. The same thing occurs in the case of registered land, where one finds a transfer and subsequent registration. I have therefore come to the conclusion that by the court order the shares were transferred to Sun Alliance, or, to use the words of Section 54, by that order property was transferred to a purchaser."
24. Expression "conveyance on sale" as provided in Section 54 of the Stamp Act, 1891 is similar to Section 2(g) of the Bombay Stamp Act. The expression "conveyance on sale" as defined in the said section includes every instrument, and every decree or order of any court or any Commissioner, whereby any property, or an estate or interest in any property, upon the sale thereof was transferred or vested in the purchaser, or any other persons on his behalf and on his direction.
25. The Court further considered as to whether the order of the judge is an "instrument" executed in any part of the United Kingdom for the purposes of Section 14(4) of the Stamp Act, 1891; it was held that it was an instrument executed in the United Kingdom within the meaning of Section 14(4) of the Stamp Act, 1891. It was further held that order of the Court was liable to stamp duty as it resulted in transferring the property and that the order passed by any court which results in transfer of property would be an instrument as it includes every document.
* * *
28. The transfer of assets and liabilities takes effect by an order of the court. The order also provides for passing of consideration from the transferee company to the shareholders of the transferor company. The consideration for sale in a transaction Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 23 W.P. No.18026/2020 like this is the shares. The share exchange ratio is decided on the basis of number of factors including the value of net assets of the transferor and transferee company. To arrive at this figure of net assets the liabilities have to be set off against the gross value of the assets. The share value is fixed. The properties belong to the company and the company belongs to the shareholders. Once the shareholders of the transferee company receive the consideration it would be deemed as if the owner has received the consideration.
29. Strong reliance was placed by the counsel for the appellants on the judgment of this Court in General Radio and Appliances Co. Ltd. v. M.A. Khader. The transferor company had taken a premises on rent with the stipulation that the tenant would not sub-let the premises without the written consent of the landlord. After sanctioning of the scheme for amalgamation by the Court, the tenanted premises came to be transferred to the transferee company. The landlord filed the eviction suit. The question before the Court was whether the amalgamation amounted to transfer of tenant company's right under the lease by way of sub-letting and as such violative of the provisions of Section 10(ii)(a) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act as also the terms of the rent agreement. It was observed that the A.P. Act prohibited in specific terms both sub-letting as well as transfer or assignment of the interest of the tenant. By the order of amalgamation, the interest, rights of the transferor company in all its properties including leasehold interest tenancy rights and possession were transferred and vested in the transferee company voluntarily and the transferor company was dissolved and ceased to exist for all practical purposes in the eye of the law. This amounted to contravention of Section 10(ii)(a) of the A.P. Rent Act as well as of the terms of the said rent agreement thereby making the transferee company liable to be evicted from the tenanted premises. Though, the Court held that the transfer was Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 24 W.P. No.18026/2020 voluntary but still to test the argument and treating it to be involuntary it was observed that there was no express provision in the A.P. Rent Act that in case of involuntary transfer or transfer of rights by virtue of a scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the court under Section 394 of the Companies Act will not come within the purview of Section 10(ii)(a) of the A.P. Rent Act, and, therefore, the transferee company is required to be evicted. Even in the case of involuntary transfer or transfer of tenancy rights by virtue of scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the court by its order under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act the transfer will come within the purview of Section 10(ii)(a) of the A.P. Rent Act. It was observed that since the order of amalgamation had been made on the basis of a petition filed by the transferor company it could not be said that it was an involuntary transfer effected by the order of the Court. Instead of supporting the contention of the appellant this decision indicates to the contrary as the Court held that the order of transfer of property by a scheme of amalgamation was not "involuntary", meaning thereby it was a voluntary act by agreement between the parties. In any case, the Court decided the dispute between the parties in the context of specific provisions of the A.P. Rent Act and would have no applicability to the point which is being examined by the present case.
30. A document creating or transferring a right is an instrument. Can it be said that an order effectuating the transfer is a document? The answer has been given in the affirmative by this Court in Haji Sk. Subhan v. Madhorao wherein it was held that the question is whether the word "document" includes a decree of the court. It was held that there was no good reason why a decree of the court, when it affects the proprietary rights and is in relation to them should not be included in this expression. This question more pointedly arose before this Court in Ruby Sales and Services (P) Ltd. In that case in a suit for specific performance the property was conveyed Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 25 W.P. No.18026/2020 to the vendee by a consent decree. The question arose whether the consent decree is an instrument and liable to be stamped. The consent decree contained a recital to the effect that "this decree does operate as the conveyance from the defendants in favour of the plaintiffs in respect of the said property more particularly described in Exhibit A to the plaint". The Court held that: (SCC p. 535, para 11) "11. There is no particular pleasure in merely going by the label but what is decisive is by the terms of the document. It is clear from the terms of the consent decree that it is also an 'instrument' under which title has been passed over to the appellants-plaintiffs. It is a live document transferring the property in dispute from the defendants to the plaintiffs." The aforesaid decree was based on an agreement between the parties. So is the case with an order under Section 394 of the Companies Act which is also based on an agreement between the transferor company and the transferee company."
43. Thus, it is clear that order passed by NCLT Allahabad, thereby accepting the Scheme of arrangement by which the properties were transferred is an "instrument" chargeable under Indian Stamp Act.
Whether the Stamp Duty is payable on the date of execution of instrument or it is payable when it is received in State of M.P.
44. Since, it is a question of law, therefore, this Court thinks it apposite to decide the same in spite of the fact that the Show Cause Notice dated 24-10-2020 was not in accordance with law.
45. By relying on the provisions of Section 3(bb) as well as Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act, it submitted by Counsel for the Petitioners, that where the "instrument" is executed outside the State of Madhya Pradesh, then the Stamp Duty would be payable only when the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 26 W.P. No.18026/2020 "instrument" is received in State of Madhya Pradesh, whereas it is the contention of the Counsel for the State that the date of receipt of "instrument" in State of Madhya Pradesh has nothing to do with the payment of stamp duty and the stamp duty would be chargeable on the date of execution of "instrument".
46. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for the parties.
47. Section 2(6) of Indian Stamp Act reads as under :
(6) "Chargeable" means, as applied to an instrument executed or first executed after the commencement of this Act, chargeable under this Act, and, as applied to any other instrument, chargeable under the law in force in India when such instrument was executed or, where several persons executed the instrument at different times, first executed:
48. Section 2(12) of Indian Stamp Act reads as under :
(12) "Executed" and "execution" used with reference to instruments, mean "signed" and "signature" and includes attribution of electronic record within the meaning of section 11 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000);
49. Section 2(14) of Indian Stamp Act reads as under :
(14) "instrument" includes,--
(a) every document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded;
(b) a document, electronic or otherwise, created for a transaction in a stock exchange or depository by which any right or liability is, or purports to be, created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded; and
(c) any other document mentioned in Schedule I, but does not include such instruments as may be specified by the Government by notification in the Official Gazette;Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 27 W.P. No.18026/2020
50. Section 3(bb) of Indian Stamp Act reads as under :
(bb) every instrument mentioned in Schedule 1-A as chargeable with duty under that schedule, which not having been previously executed by any person, is executed out of Madhya Pradesh on or after the commencement of the Central Provinces and Berar Indian Stamp (Amendment) Act, 1939 and relates to any property situated or to any matter or thing done or to be done, in Madhya Pradesh and is received in Madhya Pradesh.
Provided further that no duty shall be chargeable in respect of,--
(1) any instrument executed by, or on behalf of, or in favour of, the Government in cases where, but for this exemption, the Government would be liable to pay the duty chargeable in respect of such instrument;
(2) any instrument for the sale, transfer or other disposition, either absolutely, or by way of mortgage or otherwise, of any ship or vessel, or any part, interest, share or property of or in any ship or vessel registered under the Merchant Shipping Act 1894 or under Act 19 of 1838, or the Indian Registration of Ships Act, 1841 (10 of 1841) as amended by subsequent Acts; (3) any instrument executed by, or, on behalf of, or, in favour of, the Developer, or Unit or in connection with the carrying out of purposes of the Special Economic Zone.
Explanation- For the purposes of this clause, the expressions "Developer", "Special Economic Zone" and "Unit" shall have meanings respectively assigned to them in clause (g), (za) and (zc) of Section 2 of the Special Economics Zones Act, 2005.
51. Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act reads as under :
19-A. Payment of duty on certain instruments liable to increased duty in Madhya Pradesh under clause (bb) of section 3 - Where any instrument has Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 28 W.P. No.18026/2020 become chargeable in any part of India other than Madhya Pradesh with duty under this Act or any other enactment for the time being in force in any part of India and thereafter becomes chargeable with a higher rate of duty in Madhya Pradesh under clause (bb) of the first proviso to section 3,--
(i) the amount of the duty chargeable on such instrument shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the first proviso to section 3, be the amount chargeable on it under Schedule I-A, less the amount of duty, if any already paid on it in India;
(ii) such instrument shall, in addition to the stamps, if any, already affixed thereto, be stamped with the stamps necessary for the payment of the amount of duty chargeable on it under clause (i) in the same manner and at the same time and by the same person as though such instrument were an instrument received in India for the first time at the time when it becomes chargeable with the higher duty.
Explanation - In this section "India" means the Whole of India (except part B States).
52. Thus, the "Execution" or "Executed" instrument means that when it is signed. Therefore, the date on which the order of NCLT Allahabad was signed would be the date of execution of "instrument". Thus, it can be safely said that the "instrument" in question was executed on 2-3- 2017.
53. It is the case of the respondent that the "instrument" would be chargeable when it is executed for the first time. It is also the case of the respondent that date of receipt of instrument in State of M.P. is not relevant.
54. The aforesaid contention raised by the Counsel for the State cannot be accepted. Section 3(bb) of Indian Stamp Act specifically provides that "if an instrument is executed out of Madhya Pradesh and Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 29 W.P. No.18026/2020 relates to any property situated or to any matter or thing done or to be done, in Madhya Pradesh and is received in Madhya Pradesh". Further Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act, makes the position very clear. Thus, if the instrument has become chargeable in any other part of India except State of Madhya Pradesh and thereafter becomes chargeable with a higher rate of duty in Madhya Pradesh under Section 3(bb) of the first proviso to section 3, then the amount of duty chargeable on such instrument shall, notwithstanding any thing contained in the first proviso to section 3, be the amount chargeable on it under Schedule 1-A, less the amount of duty, if any, already paid on it in India. The Supreme Court in the case of New Central Jute Mills Co. Ltd. (Supra) has held as under :
"16. Some complications arise in the cases where both the liabilities arise -- i.e. where the instrument is executed in one State but is related to property situated in or to things done or to be done in another State and is received in the second State. In these cases the liability to stamp duty arises first under the stamp law of the first State on account of the execution in the State; a second liability arises under the law of the second State when the instrument is received in that second State.
* * * *
19. Section 19-A in terms applies only to an instrument which afters becoming chargeable in any State outside Uttar Pradesh becomes chargeable in Uttar Pradesh with a higher rate of duty. It seems to us, however, that where the rate of duty in Uttar Pradesh is the same or even lower, no further duty is payable on such an instrument. For, it would be anomalous and unreasonable to hold that the legislature intended that though where a higher rate is payable in Uttar Pradesh the excess need only be paid, the Uttar Pradesh rate should be paid in full where what has already been paid is the same or Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 30 W.P. No.18026/2020 higher.
* * * *
20. The result of this will be that if an instrument after becoming liable to duty in one State on execution there becomes liable to duty also in another State on receipt there, it must first be stamped in accordance with the law of the first State and it will not require to be further stamped in accordance with the law of the second State when the rate of that second State is the same or lower; and where the rate of the second State is higher, it will require to be stamped only with the excess amount and that in accordance with the law and the rules in force in the second State."
55. Therefore, in order to apply the provisions of Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act, the date of ascertainment and payment of Stamp Duty is not material, but the important aspect is the liability to pay stamp duty. In the present case, since, the instrument was executed in State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, the first liability of the Petitioner No.1 was to pay the Stamp Duty chargeable in the State of U.P. and thereafter, the Petitioner No.1 was liable to pay the difference of stamp duty to the State of M.P., provided the rate of duty is higher than that of State of Uttar Pradesh.
56. However, in the present case, the situation is slightly different. The Petitioner No.1 paid the Stamp Duty in Uttar Pradesh after the stamp duty was ascertained in State of M.P. Therefore, it is held that since, the instrument was executed in State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, the date of execution of instrument for the purposes of charging stamp duty in State of M.P. would not be relevant but the relevant date would be the date on which the instrument was received in State of M.P. However, as the Petitioner No.1 had not paid the stamp duty in Uttar Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 31 W.P. No.18026/2020 Pradesh prior to ascertainment of stamp duty by Collector of Stamps, Sidhi, therefore, the Petitioner No.1 would not be entitled to seek adjustment/ set off of the stamp duty paid by it in Uttar Pradesh. What is the date on which the instrument was received in the State of M.P.?
57. The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that infact the date of receipt of instrument in State of M.P. was 5-8-2019, although in the reply to the Show Cause Notice as well as in the Writ Petition, the Petitioner has claimed that the relevant date is 24-10-2017. Although a very weak attempt was made by Counsel for the State that the relevant date would be 29-6-2017, but thereafter, the State Counsel, changed its stand and submitted that only the date of execution of instrument is relevant and not the date on which the "instrument" was received in State of M.P.
58. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for the parties.
59. As already pointed out, every taxing statute including, charging, computation and exemption clauses, has to be interpreted strictly. However, in case of ambiguity in charging provisions, the benefit necessarily goes to the assessee, but for an exemption notification or exemption clause the benefit of ambiguity must be strictly interpreted in favour of the Revenue/State. Therefore, a person claiming exemption has to establish that his case squarely falls within the exemption notification, and while doing so, a notification should be construed against the assessee in case of ambiguity.
60. In Section 3(bb) and Section 19-A of Indian Stamp Act, the word "Received" is mentioned and not "Produced or submitted or actually received". If the word "Received" is read as a synonyms of "Produced Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 32 W.P. No.18026/2020 or submitted or actually received", then the payment of stamp duty would be at the mercy of the party to the "instrument," and this interpretation would frustrate the very purpose of fiscal laws. It is well established principle of law that if any interpretation leads to absurdity, then such interpretation should be avoided. One of the meaning of "Received" is accepting a statement to be correct/true. As already pointed out every taxing statue including charging has to be interpreted strictly. If a person wants to seek exemption from payment of duty, then he has to establish that his case falls within the exemption notification. In the present case, although the State in its reply has pleaded that four documents were got registered on 29-6-2017, but has not clarified the nature of those documents. However, it was submitted by Shri P. Chidambaram, Senior Advocate, that those four documents were Mining Lease Transfer Deeds. Since, the mining lease were in the name of JAL, therefore, mining lease transfer deeds were executed because after having purchased the property, the Petitioner No.1 did not want that anything should be left in the name of JAL.
61. The respondent in para 39 of its return has taken a very vague stand. The said para reads as under :
"Reply to Para 6.36 :- Thus stamp duty calculated based on the express provision of Indian Stamp Act and decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and high Courts time and again about the date for calculation of stamp duty.
The Petitioner has himself registered four documents on 29-6-2017 based on the scheme sanctioned by NCLT Mumbai and Allahabad in Sidhi District. Following documents no. were registered much before they wrote to Principal Secretary about NCLT order.
1. MP418412017A1362320 dated 29-6-2017 Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 33 W.P. No.18026/2020
2. MP418412017A1362376 dated 29-6-2017
3. MP418412017A1361293 dated 29-6-2017
4. MP418412017A1362414 dated 29-6-2017 In all of the above deed the petitioner clearly declares that "3.5 the transferee hereby declares that as per the scheme of arrangement approved by national company law tribunal (NCLT) vide orders dated February, 15 2017 and March 2, 2017 of Mumbai bench and Allahabad bench respectively, he/it was accepted all the conditions and liabilities which the transferor was having in respect of such mining lease."
Clearly petitioner has been using the NCLT order for executing deeds much before their letter to Principal Secretary."
62. For the reasons best known to the State, the aforementioned documents have not been placed on record. However, an equally vague reply was given by the Petitioners in their rejoinder. However, as already pointed out, Shri P. Chidambaram, Senior Advocate has accepted that those four documents were Mining Lease Transfer Deeds andthe aforesaid deeds were got registered because the Petitioner No.1 did not want that any mining lease should remain in the name of JAL. Although it has not been clarified by any of the party, that whether the copy of order passed by NCLT Allahabad was submitted at the time of registration of four documents or not, but one thing is clear that there is a clear reference of order of NCLT Allahabad. Not only there was reference of order of NCLT Allahabad in the registered deeds, but the execution of four Mining Lease Transfer Deeds clearly show that the Petitioner No.1 had acted upon the order passed by the NCLT Allahabad. Once, the Petitioner no.1 had put the instrument i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad into operation and had also got the mining lease Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 34 W.P. No.18026/2020 transferred in its name, then it is held that even if the copy of order of NCLT Allahabad might not have been filed, but still the reference of said order and further action on the basis of said order, would certain mean that the "instrument" i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad was received in State of M.P. on 29-6-2017.
63. Therefore, it is held that the chargeable "instrument" i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad was received in Madhya Pradesh on 29-6-2017 and not on 24-10-2017 or 5-8-2019.
Whether the Notification dated 3-7-2017 by which cap of Rs. 25 Cr. was provided would apply to the facts of the case or not?
64. Since, this Court has already held that the instrument i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad was received in State of M.P. on 29-6-2017, therefore, the legal position which was in vogue on 29-6-2017 would apply. Even the Counsel for the Petitioner could not point out anything from record that Notification dated 3-7-2017 had retrospective operation. The Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)- I, New Delhi v. Vatika Township Private Limited, reported in (2015) 1 SCC 1 has held as under :
"34. It would also be pertinent to mention that assessment creates a vested right and an assessee cannot be subjected to reassessment unless a provision to that effect inserted by amendment is either expressly or by necessary implication retrospective. (See CED v. M.A. Merchant.)
35. We would also like to reproduce hereunder the following observations made by this Court in Govind Das v. ITO, while holding Section 171(6) of the Income Tax Act to be prospective and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to 1-4- 1962, the date on which the Income Tax Act came into force: (SCC p. 914, para 11) Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 35 W.P. No.18026/2020 "11. Now it is a well-settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decisions that, unless the terms of a statute expressly so provide or necessarily require it, retrospective operation should not be given to a statute so as to take away or impair an existing right or create a new obligation or impose a new liability otherwise than as regards matters of procedure. The general rule as stated by Halsbury in Vol. 36 of the Laws of England (3rd Edn.) and reiterated in several decisions of this Court as well as English courts is that 'all statutes other than those which are merely declaratory or which relate only to matters of procedure or of evidence are prima facie prospective and retrospective operation should not be given to a statute so as to affect, alter or destroy an existing right or create a new liability or obligation unless that effect cannot be avoided without doing violence to the language of the enactment. If the enactment is expressed in language which is fairly capable of either interpretation, it ought to be construed as prospective only.' "
(emphasis supplied)
36. In CIT v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd., this Court held that as the liability to pay tax is computed according to the law in force at the beginning of the assessment year i.e. the first day of April, any change in law affecting tax liability after that date though made during the currency of the assessment year, unless specifically made retrospective, does not apply to the assessment for that year."
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 36 W.P. No.18026/202065. Since, the "instrument" i.e., the order of NCLT, Allahabad was already received in M.P. on 29-6-2017, therefore, it became chargeable on the said date and the rate of stamp duty which was prevailing on 29- 6-2017 would apply. It is held that since, the cap on stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 25 Cr came into existence by Notification dated 3-7-2017, therefore, the Petitioner No. 1 is not entitled for the benefit of cap of Rs. 25 cr. Thus, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi did not commit any mistake by not extending the benefit of cap of Rs. 25 cr. Thus, the findings recorded by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi regarding cap of Rs. 25 cr. is affirmed, although on different ground. It is further observed, that the findings given by Collector of Stamps, Sidhi are not well reasoned as claimed by State Counsel.
Whether Stamp Duty of 1% is chargeable on movable properties?
66. It is submitted by Counsel for Petitioner, that the stamp duty is payable as per proviso to Article 25 of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act. The aforesaid submission made by Counsel for the Petitioner is not rebutted by the Counsel for the respondent. Thus, as admitted by both the parties, the stamp duty would be payable as per Proviso to Article 25 of Schedule 1-A, which reads as under :
Provided that,--
(a) Where an instrument relates to the merger or amalgamation of companies under the orders of Tribunal/Court under Section 232 and 234 of the Companies Act, 2013(18 of 2013), or under the order of the Reserve Bank of India under Section 44-A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) the duty chargeable shall be an amount equal to 5% of the market value of the immovable property transferred which is located within the State of Madhya Pradesh; or an amount equal to 0.5% of the aggregate of the market value of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 37 W.P. No.18026/2020 shares issued or allotted in exchange or otherwise and the amount of consideration paid for such transfer, whichever is higher.
(b) When an instrument relates to an assignment of a debt, the rate of duty shall be one thousand rupees.
(c) Where an agreement to sell an immovable property is stamped with ad-valorem duty required for a conveyance and a sale deed in pursuance of such agreement is sub-sequently executed, the duty on such sale deed shall be the duty payable under the article less the duty already paid, subject to a minimum of Rs.1000.
(d) Where a power of attorney authorizing the agent to, sell immovable property is stamped with ad-valorem duty required for a conveyance and a sale deed is executed in pursuance of power of attorney between the executants of attorney and the person in whose favour it is executed, the duty on the sale deed shall be the duty payable under the article less the duty already paid, subject to a minimum of Rs.1000.
(e) Where a mortgage deed or an agreement to mortgage is stamped with ad-valorem duty required for a mortgage under article 43 and a court decree in pursuance of a suit filed against the mortgaged property, or a mortgage deed is executed, the duty payable on the decree or the mortgage deed shall be the duty payable under article 43, on the mortgage deed, subject to a minimum of Rs.1000.
(f) Where by an instrument, a person includes the name of his wife or daughter or daughter-in-
law severally or jointly as co-owner in his property, the rate of duty shall be one percent on the market value of the property.
(g) When an instrument relates to transfer of development right and/or construction right, obtained from the instrument executed under article 6(d)(i), along with consent of land owner or lessee, as the case may be, the rate of duty shall be Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 38 W.P. No.18026/2020 one percent of market value of the land related to transfer of such right or consideration, whichever is higher, subject to a minimum of one thousand rupees.
67. It is the case of the Petitioner, that as per above mentioned provision, no stamp duty is chargeable on movable property, whereas the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has charged 1% of the market value of the movable property.
68. Whereas it is the stand of the respondent that as per the Notification dated 2-1-2015, stamp duty @ 1% is chargeable on movable properties.
69. Considered the submission made by Counsel for the parties.
70. The relevant provision has already been reproduced. Notification No. F.B.-4-29-2014-2-V(01) dated 2nd January 2015 reads as under :
"In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub- section (1) of section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (No. II of 1899) and in supersession of all previous notifications issued in this behalf, the State Government, hereby, reduce/remit stamp duty on documents mentioned in column (3) of the table below on the articles mentioned in column (2) of Schedule 1-A of the said Act, namely, :-
TABLE S.No. Article Reductions/ Remissions (1) (2) (3)
1. Article-5- 1. On affidavit affirmed by a Affidavit member of a Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.
2. On affidavit sworn or affirmed by a member of the Other Backward Classes, as specified in the State Government notification No. F-8-5-25-4-84, dated the 26th December, 1984, as amended from time to time,
3. On affidavit submitted before a Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 39 W.P. No.18026/2020 Commission of Inquiry appointed by the Government of India or the State Government under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 (60 of 1952)
4. On affidavit submitted under Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 (21 OF 1985).
5. On affidavit made as a condition of enrollment under the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957) or the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950).
6 On affidavit made for the sole purpose of being filed or used in any Court or before the officer of any Court.
7. On affidavit made for the sole purpose of enabling any person to receive any pension or charitable allowance,
2. Article-6- 1. On instruments executed by Agreement units under Madhya Pradesh or Khadi and Gramodyog Board for Memorand obtaining assistance from the um of an Board.
agreement 2. On instruments of agreement required to be executed by eligible users belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes living below the poverty line with the Madhya Pradesh Vidyut Vitaran Company Jabalpur, Bhopal, and Indore for obtaining single-point metered electricity connection.
3. On instruments executed by agriculturists in favour of Banks for securing loans under the Kisan Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 40 W.P. No.18026/2020 Credit Card Scheme.
4. On instrument executed by Self Help Groups in favour of banks for securing loans upto Ten Lakh Rupees for economic development of group members under the NABARD sponsored schemes.
5. Stamp duty is exempted on instruments executed by herbal or ayurved based industry in favour of any financial institution, to secure repayment of loans obtained for industrial purposes only till the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy 2010, as amended in 2012 or the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work-plan remains in operation subject to the conditions, that :--
(a) the industrial unit is situated in an industrial area or industrial growth centre developed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh or Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam ; and
(b) a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the industry is eligible for remission of stamp duty under this order, is issued by the Commissioner of Industry, Government of Madhya Pradesh.
6. On instruments of agreement related to development of Government land executed by the Tourism Department of the State for tourism projects.
7. Stamp duty is reduced to Rupees Five Hundred only on instruments of agreement relating to repayment of education loan.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 41 W.P. No.18026/20208. Stamp duty is reduced to Rupees Five Hundred only on loan related instruments to be executed with Banks for establishment of technical educational institutions,
9. On Agreement or memorandum of am agreement--
(a) for or relating to the sale of goods or merchandise exclusively, not being a Note or Memorandum chargeable under article 46,
(b) made in the form of tenders to the Central Government for or relating to any loan.
3. Article-7- 1. On instruments executed by Agreement units under Madhya Pradesh relating to Khadi and Gramodyog Board for deposit of obtaining assistance from the title deeds, Board.
pawn, 2. On agreements relating to pledge or deposit of title deeds executed by hypothecati industrialists or industrial on undertakings in the State in connection with obtaining loans or advances for industrial purposes from Khadi and Village Industries Commission and Madhya Pradesh Khadi and Gramodyog Board.
3. On instruments executed by agriculurists in favour of Banks For securing loans under the Kisan Credit Card Scheme.
4. On instruments executed by Self Help Groups in favour of banks for securing loans for economic development of group members to the limit of 10 Lakh Rupees under the NABARD sponsored schemes.
5. On instruments of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 42 W.P. No.18026/2020 hypothecation executed in favour of banks for securing loan upto Ten Lakh Rupees for agricultural purposes by any Bhumiswami or a patiadhari holding land under Revenue Book Circular -IV-3-10. Also, no stamp duty shall be chargeable for this purpose up to any limit in case of a person belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes,
6. On instruments executed by herbal or ayurved based industries in favour of any financial institution, to secure repayment of loans obtained for industrial purposes only till the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2010 as amended in 2012 or Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work plan remains in operation subject to the conditions, that :--
(a) the industrial unit is situated in an industrial area or industrial growth centre developed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh or Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam; and
(b) a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the industry is eligible for remission of stamp duty under this order, is issued by the Commissioner of Industry, Government of Madhya Pradesh,
7. On instruments of equitable mortgage/hypothecation executed by a new unit/expanded unit/ modernized unit of an Information Technology' Business Process Outsourcing company for Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 43 W.P. No.18026/2020 obtaining loans from banks/ financial institutions in Information Technology investment area, subject to the condition that the new unit/ expanded unit modernized unit is certified to be an information technology/ Business Process Outsourcing outfit by Information Technology Department or any designated agency notified by them under the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012, as amended 2014 or Madhya Pradesh Business Process Outsourcing/ Business Process Management (Business Process Outsourcing /Business Process Management) Industry Investment Policy, 2014 of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Note--This exemption shall be applicable only till the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012, as amended in 2014 or Madhya Pradesh Business Process Outsourcing/ Business Process 'Management (BPO/BPM) Industry Investment Policy, 2014 remains in operations.
8. Stamp duty is reduced to 0.125 percent of the amount of loan secured on instruments of agreement relating to deposit of title deeds for securing loans upto rupees ten crore in case of micro and small scale industries and on loans for residential purposes.
9. On instruments relating to deposit of title deeds, executed by Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 44 W.P. No.18026/2020 beneficiary in favour of any bank of financial institution for securing repayment of loan of advance upto Rs. One Lakh to be received by him for the purpose of construction of house under the Mukhyamantri Gramin Awas Yojna, subject to the condition that a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the beneficiary is eligible for the remission of stamp duty is issued by the Collector of the concerned district.
10. On letter of hypothecation accompanying a Bill of Exchange.
11. On instrument of pawn or pledge of agriculture produce, if unattested.
4. Article-9- 1. On Appraisement or valuation Appraiseme made for the information of one nt or party only, and not being in any valuation manner obligatory between parties either by agreement or operation of law.
2. On Appraisement of crops for the purpose of ascertaining the amount to be given to a landlord as rent.
5. Article - 10 1. On contracts executed by an
- adult apprentice or by the Apprentices guardian of a 'minor apprentice in hip deed favour of an employer under the Apprentices Act, 1961 (52 of1961).
2. On instruments of apprenticeship by which a person is apprenticed by or at the charge of any public charity.
6. Article 14. On Bond when executed by any Bond person for the purpose of guaranteeing that the local income Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 45 W.P. No.18026/2020 derived from private subscriptions to a charitable dispensary or hospital or any other object of public utility shall not be less than a specified sum per mensem.
7. Article - 16 On instrument of cancellation of a
- will.
Cancellation
8. Article - 25 1. On the instruments of sale
- executed by Madhya Pradesh Conveyance Housing Board, Nagar Vikas Pradhikarans, Primary Co-
operative Housing Societies and Madhya Pradesh State Co-
operative Housing Federation, in relation to house/apartment to the extent of the value of the house/apartment (excluding value of plot) constructed under self financing scheme, with the money received from the purchaser, subject to following conditions, namely :--
(a) the chargeable stamp duty shall be exempted /reduced to the extent of 100 percent, 50 percent and 25 percent for the categories, of house/ apartment of Economically Weaker Section, Low Income' Group and Middle Income Group respectively, but no exemption/reduction shall be granted in cases of High Income Group houses/apartments;
(b) this exemption/reduction shall be limited only to original allottees under the Self Financing Scheme,
(c) economically Weaker Sections, Low Income Group and Middle income Group shall be as Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 46 W.P. No.18026/2020 defined and specified by the Department of Urban Development and Environment from time to time:
Provided that this remission shall not be available in case of partly constructed house/apartment.
2. On all kinds of deeds of transfers of agricultural land executed by a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribes in favour of bis legal heir/heirs during his life time.
3. On instruments of sale relating to plot or built up space executed by or on behalf of State Government or any Semi Government Organization or any Government Undertaking, in favour of Information Technology/ Business Process Outsourcing Industries to be established in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
4. On instruments of conveyance of industrial units as a going concern, the rate of duty on the value of plant, machinery and other movables conveyed by the instrument shall be one percent, and also the duty chargeable on a single instrument shall not exceed rupees ten crore.
5. On instruments of sale executed by or on behalf of financial institutions, Government Agencies, or Private Sector by which space/premises in an Information Technology investment area is tansferred in Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 47 W.P. No.18026/2020 favour of a new unit/ expanded unit/ modernized unit of an IT/ Business Process Outsourcing company, subject to the condition that it is certified to be an information technology/ Business Process Outsourcing outfit by Information Technology Department or any designated agency notified by them under the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012, as amended in 2014 or the Madhya Pradesh Business Process Ontsourcing/ Business Process Management (Business Process Outsourcing /Business Process Management) Industry Investment Policy, 2014 of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Note --This exemption shall only be applicable till the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012, as amended 2014 or Madhya Pradesh Business Process Outsourcing/ Business "Process Management (BPO/BPM) Industry Investment Policy, 2014 remains in operations.
6. On instruments of sale of land executed in favour of persons, whose land has been acquired for Auto Testing Track Project, Pithampur, District Dhar, the chargeable stamp duty shall be remitted subject to the following, conditions, namely :-- (a) a certificate in the enclosed format from the Collector of Dhar District is obtained , in which the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 48 W.P. No.18026/2020 amount of compensation as well as special rehabilitation grant paid for acquisition of land for Auto Testing Track Project , Pithampur is mentioned;
(b) the position in clause(a) above, is expressed in the instrument of sale itself, and
(c) the eligibility of exemption shall be limited to the amount of stamp duty chargeable on the amount of compensation and special rehabilitation grant.
(d) the stamp duty chargeable on such instrument in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (II of 1899) shall be reimbursed by the Commerce.
Industry and Employment Department to the Commercial Taxes Department within one month from the date of registration of the instrument.
CERTIFICATE
No... Dated..........
Certified that land having
area....... Hectare of Shri
.........R/o Village........
Tehsil......... District Dhar has been acquired for Auto Testing Track Project, Peethampur, District Dhar, for which the amount of compensation and special rehabilitation grant paid is as under :-
Compensation Amount -
Amount of Special rehabilitation grant -
Total -
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 49 W.P. No.18026/20202. This certificate shall be applicable for granting exemption of stamp duty on deed of sale of land having area................
hectare situated at Village................... executed by Shri.................. S/o Shri................... in favour of Shri................... S/o Shri .................. After this registry, the eligibility of exemption of stamp duty shall be available only to the extent of duty chargeable on Rs................. the balance amount of Compensation and special rehabilitation grant. But in no case the amount of duty exempted shall exceed the amount of duty chargeable on the sum of amount of compensation and special rehabilitation grant obtained by Shri..................... S/o Shri................ .
Collector, Dhar
7. Stamp duty shall be reduced to half on instrument of sale executed by private persons in favour of a Unit established to generate electricity from non-
conventional energy resources subject to the following conditions, namely:-
(a) a Bank Guarantee of the sum equal to the amount of stamp duty remitted shall be given by the unit in favour of the State Government for a period of 21 months in case of Wind Energy or Solar Energy Projects and for a period of 36 months in case of Bio-gas or Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 50 W.P. No.18026/2020 Municipal Waste projects; and
(b) the unit shall be liable to pay the amount of stamp duty remitted to the State Government, if the project is not established within the given period of Bank Guarantee. It shall also be the responsibility of the unit lo produce before the District Registrar of the concerned district in which the land purchased is situated, a certificate from the Competent Authority appointed by the Energy Department in this behalf, that the unit has been established before the prescribed period of Bank Guarantee. In case of default, the amount of duty remitted shall be recoverable from the Bank Guarantee tendered by the unit for the purpose.
8. On instruments of transfer of developed land in a Food Park executed by the developer of the park in favour of a Food Processing Unit, the remission shall be granted subject to the following conditions, namely:--
(a) the duty charged on the instrument of purchase of the said land shall be adjusted in proportion to the part of land transferred; and
(b) if on adjustment no duty is required to be paid , then the minimum duty for the transfer shall be rupees five Hundred only.
9. On instruments of sale of land executed in favour of a Goshala registered by the Madhya Pradesh Gopalan Evam Pashudhan Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 51 W.P. No.18026/2020 Samwardhan Board, Bhopal.
10. On instruments of sale executed by the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board, Nagar Vikas Pradhikarans, Madhya Pradesh State Co-operative Housing Federation or any Urban Local Body in Madhya Pradesh in favour of a person of economically weaker section.
"Economically Weaker Section"
shall be as defined and specified by the Department of Urban Development and Environment from time to time. A Certificate from the District Collector to this effect shall have to be produced. The remission of stamp duty shall also be available where the instruments of lease of residential house is executed under the Basic Service For Urban Poor (B.S.U.P)/Integrated Housing and Development Program(I.H.S.D.P.) in favour of a person, who surrenders the lease already held by him under the Madhya Pradesh Nagariya Kshetro Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ka Pradan Kiya Jana) Adhiniyam, 1984 from the Government on the sites under construction by the said agencies.
11. Instruments of conveyance relating to conversion of lease hold rights into freehold rights of private or nazul land executed by or on behalf of the Government or a Semi-Government Organization or any Government undertaking or Housing Co-operative Society Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 52 W.P. No.18026/2020 established or registered under any law for the time being in force, shall be chargeable in reduction to the extent only on the amount of consideration paid for the conversion, as set-forth in the instrument, but in no case shall the amount of duty chargeable be less than rupees Five Hundred.
12. On the instrument of sale of sick/closed industrial units which are referred to the Board of Industrial Finance and Reconstruction (B.I.F.R.) of a liquidator or acquired by financial institutions or banks or which fall in the category of sick industry as defined by the Reserve Bank of India, subject to the conditions that,-
(i) the remission shall be granted only once, On conveyance of unit/assets on which exemption under this notification has been granted once, no exemption in any case shall be granted again;
(ii) the remission shall be granted only to such closed and sick units in which the high power committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh or the Empowered Committee headed by the Collector of the District, as the case may be, constituted under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy 2010, as amended 2012 or Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work plan has taken a decision to remit the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 53 W.P. No.18026/2020 stamp duty;
(iii) to obtain remission the purchaser of unit will have to produce a scheme for revival of the unit before the, competent authority explaining his financial position, Also the purchaser shall give an undertaking before the Competent Authority that he will revive the industry within eighteen months and in case of violation pay the amount of stamp duty remitted along with an interest at the simple rate of 0.75 percent for every month or part thereof from the date of execution of the instrument. For revival he shall be entitled to use the option of diversification of the product; and
(iv) the remission shall be subject to the certificate of Competent Authority to the effect that the instrument is eligible for remission under this notification, The competent authority authorized to issue the said certificate shall be as under :--
Value /Market value Competent of the unit Authority
(i) Where it does not exceed one crore rupees - Collector of the concerned District
(ii) Where it exceeds one crore Rupees - Divisional Commissioner of the concerned Division Note--This exemption shall be applicable only till the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy 2010, as Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 54 W.P. No.18026/2020 amended 2012 or Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work-plan.
13. On instruments of sale or merger or amalgamation of industrial units as a going concern stamp duty shall be reduced to a maximum of Ten Lakhs rupees when the amount chargeable exceeds that amount. This reduction in duty shall be applicable subject to the conditions that--
(a) the said instrument is executed for better capacity utilization of the industry,
(b) the production of the industry in any three of the immediately preceding five years has not exceeded 50 percent of the installed capacity,
(c) any bank or financial institution which has extended loan to the industry has considered its loan as non-performing asset for immediately preceding two years,
(d) the net worth of the industry has been reduced to less than one half of its net worth immediately preceding five years ago; and
(e) a certificate to the effect that the instrument is eligible for concession under this notification is issued by the Collector of the concerned District in cases where the sale price of the industry does not exceed rupees One Crore and by the Commissioner of the concerned division in other cases. Note--The exemption under this Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 55 W.P. No.18026/2020 notification shall be applicable only till the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion policy 2010 as amended 2012 or Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work-plan remains in operation.
14, On instruments of conveyance of 12.713 acre land in the campus of former Higher Secondary Technical School, Shahdol and 8 hectare land of Government Survey No. 556/1 of Village Kalyanpura in Jhubua District in favour of Rajeev Gandhi Technical University, Bhopal for establishment of University Institute of Technology, a constituent institution of Rajeev Gandhi Technical University, Bhopal.
15. On instruments of conveyance of 12,120 hectare (25 acres) of total land of four survey numbers i.e. area 7.422 hectare out of 8.359 hectare of survey number 108/3, area 0.063 hectare of survey number 116, area 2.023 hectare of survey number 117/1, and area of 0.612 hectare out of 1.517 hectare of survey number 138, of Village Malsipur in Tehsil Sironj, executed in favour of Rajeev Gandhi Technology University, Bhopal for establishment of University Institute of Technology, Sironj, Vidisha District, a constituent institution of Rajeev Gandhi Technology University, Bhopal.
16. On instruments of purchase of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 56 W.P. No.18026/2020 land by displaced/ effected families, to the extent of payable compensation and special rehabilitation grant according to award in cases of land acquisition for establishing Thermal Power Project by M/s New Zone india Private Limited in District Anuppur, subject to the following conditions, namely:--
(a) the formal sanction shall be issued after the essential amount of expected compensation of stamp duty of rehabilitation package for this project is deposited in designated revenue head of public account by District Collector;
(b) a certificate in favour of every displaced family under rehabilitation package of this project shall be issued by the District Collector, in which the amount of compensation alongwith amount of special rehabilitation grant payable to displaced person shall be mentioned, and the entitlement of exemption of amount of stamp duty shall also be certified in it, This certificate shall be submitted by the displaced person at the time of registration of deed of acquired land before Registering Officer.
The eligibility of exemption of payable stamp duty shall be limited to the extent of amount of compensation and special rehabilitation grant;
(c) the demand for reimbursement of stamp duty on the basis of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 57 W.P. No.18026/2020 registered deeds under this project shall be submitted every month by District Registrar to District Collector, and District Collector shall deposit the amount of reimbursement in account head "0030 Stamps and Registration"
within one month from the date of receipt of demand; and
(d) the exemption on stamp duty shall be valid only for two years from the date of payment of compensation and rehabilitation grant.
17. On instruments of sale executed to acquire land in favour of member of a family displaced on account of the Narmada Valley Projects subject to the following conditions, namely ---
(a) a certificate from the Land Acquisition Officer of the project area is obtained in which the total amount including the amount of compensation item wise of his land and other immovable properties, special rehabilitation grant, rehabilitation grant etc. is mentioned. But the amount of transport fee paid for self transportation of goods shall not be included;
(b) the agricultural land and/ or other immovable property is purchased by the displaced person any where in the State of Madhya Pradesh during the process of rehabilitation;
(c) the position in clause (a) and
(b) above is expressed in the instrument of transfer itself;
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 58 W.P. No.18026/2020(d) the eligibility of exemption shall be limited to the amount of Stamp duty chargeable on the value of land and/ or immovable property or the total amount of consideration paid to the said displaced person as compensation, special rehabilitation grant, rehabilitation grant, financial assistance etc., whichever is less;
(e) the Stamp duty chargeable on the instrument will be reimbursed by the Narmada Valley Development Authority to Commercial 'Tax Department con the basis of demand letter produced by the Sub-Registrar;
(f) only a displaced family as defined in the Rehabilitation Policy shall be entitled for exemption; and
(g) such landless displaced person and adult son, who want to purchase agricultural land and / or other immovable property from various amounts such as rehabilitation grant, financial assistance given to purchase productive assets, financial assistance given for developed residential plot at the:
rehabilitation place, shall also be entitled for the said exemption.
18. on instruments executed for,--
(a) transfer of land acquired by the Commerce, Industry and Employment Department of the State Government, to the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) Company constituted for establishment of Vikram Udyogpuri Project in Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 59 W.P. No.18026/2020 District Ujjain under Delhi-
Mumbai Industrial Corridor sub- region in the State of Madhya Pradesh;
(b) for first transfer of a parcel of land by Special Purpose Vehicle to any developer, tenderer, construction company or joint venture in the course of execution of the Master Plan of the above mentioned Vikram Udyogpuri Project. It is clarified that for this purpose, certificate from Managing Director, TRIFAC or any other officer authorized in this behalf shall be required.
19. On Assignment of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957 (14 of 1957) 9 Article-26- 1. On copy of any paper which a Copy or public officer is expressly Extract required by law to make or furnish for record in any public office or for any public purpose,
2. On copy of extract from any register relating to births, baptisms, naming, dedications, marriages, divorces, deaths and burials 10 Article-27- On counterpart of any lease or granted to a cultivator when such Counterpa a lease is exempted from duty. rt duplicate 11 Article-34- Stamp duty chargeable on deeds Exchange of exchange of agricultural land of Property upto two hectare is remitted under following conditions, namely:-
(a) the lands being exchanged are agricultural;
(b) the lands being exchanged are approximately of equal market Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 60 W.P. No.18026/2020 value;
(c) the lands being exchanged shall not be Nazul or extra-Nazul agricultural lands;
(d) the lands being exchanged are situated within the same Revenue Inspector Circle; and
(e) provision shall not be misused for evading Ceiling on agricultural land.
12 Article-35- 1. On instruments of further Further charge without possession charge executed in favour of banks for securing Joan up to ten lakh rupees for agricultural purposes by any Bhumiswami or a pattadhari holding land under Revenue Book Circular -IV-3-10, Also, no stamp duty shall be chargeable for this purpose up to any limit in case of a person belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
2. On instruments executed by agriculturists in favour of Banks for securing loans under the Kisan Credit Card Scheme.
13 Article-36- 1. On instrument of gift executed Gift in favour of the State Government.
2. On instruments of gift of land executed in favour of a Goshala registered by the Madhya Pradesh Gopalan Evam Pasbudhan Samwardhan Board, Bhopal.
3. On instruments of gift of Agricultural land executed by a person belonging to Scheduled Tribe in favour of is legal heir/heirs during his life time. 14 Article-37- On indemnity bonds to be Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 61 W.P. No.18026/2020 Indemnity executed by the guardians of Bond minor dependents of deceased members of the Coal Mines Provident Fund for the purpose of obtaining refund of the fund accumulations.
15 Article-38- 1. On lease deeds executed in Lease relation to the constructed sheds and land allotted to unemployed engineers in notified industrial area by the Commerce, Industries and Employment Department for running their own industry stamp duty shall be remitted subject to the following conditions, namely:-
(a) the applicant or all the partners of the firm are either degree or diploma- holder engineer:
(b) his total income or the income of his partners from all sources shall not exceed One Thousand rupees per month.
2. On instruments of lease executed by Government in favour of Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Corporation in relation to the land on which the units of the said corporation are situated.
3. On instruments of lease of the Government land executed by the Tourism Department of State of Madhya Pradesh for tourism projects.
4. On instruments of Lease relating to plot or built up space executed by or on behalf of State Government or any Semi Government Organization or any Government Undertaking, in favour of the Information Technology Industries to be Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 62 W.P. No.18026/2020 established in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
5. On lease deed executed in favour of a Fisherman Co-
operative Society registered or deemed to be registered under the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative societies Act, 1960(No. 17 of 1961) relating to catch fishes from a reservoir and measuring not more than two thousand hectares in area.
6. On instruments of lease executed by a Gram Panchayat in favour of fishermen to catch fishes from the reservoir.
7. On instrument of lease executed by or on behalf of Financial Institutions, Government Agencies, or Private Sector by which space/premises in an Information Technology investment area is transferred in favour of a new unit/expanded unit/ modernized unit of an Information Technology/ Business Process Outsourcing company and is certified to be an Information Technology/ Business Process Outsourcing outfit by Information Technology Department or any designated agency notified by then under the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012 as amended in 2014 or the Madhya Pradesh Business Process outsourcing/ Business Process Management (Business Process Outsourcing /Business Process Management) Industry Investment Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 63 W.P. No.18026/2020 Policy. 2014 of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Note-This exemption shall be applicable only till the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012, as amended in 2014 or the Madhya Pradesh Business Process outsourcing/ Business Process Management (Business Process Outsourcing/Business Process Management) Industry Investment Policy, 2014, remains.
8. On instruments of amendment of lease executed by the Commerce, Industries and Employment Department of Madhya Pradesh or Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendru Vikas Nigam in favour of herbal or ayurved based industry due to change of name of the industry, addition of a partner partners, collaboration or its reconstruction, subject to the following conditions, namely:-
(a) the industrial unit is situated in an industrial area or industrial growth centre developed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh or Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam, and
(b) a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the industry is eligible for remission of stamp duty is issued by the Commissioner of Commerce, Industries and Employment Department.
Government of Madhya Pradesh.
9. On instruments of lease Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 64 W.P. No.18026/2020 executed by the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board, Nagar Vikas Pradhikarans, Madhya Pradesh State Co-operative Housing Federation or any urban Local Body in Madhya Pradesh in favour of a person of Economically Weaker Section as defined and specified by the Urban Development and Environment Department from time to time. A certificate from the District Collector to this effect shall have to be produced.
The remission of stamp duty shall also be available where the instrument of lease of residential house is executed under the Basic Service For Urban Poor (B.S.U.P.)/Integrated Housing and Development Program(1.H.S.D.P.) in favour of a person, who surrenders the lease already held by him under the Madhya Pradesh Nagariya Kshetro Ke Bhoomihin Vyakti (Pattadhriti Adhikaron Ku Pradan Kiya Jana) Adhiniyam, 1984 (No. 15 of 1984) from the Government on the sites under construction by the said agencies.
10. On instrument of amendment of lease of land and sheds in the Industrial Areas and Industrial Growth Centers, executed by or on behalf of the State Government or any undertaking of the State Government, chargeable in reduction to the extent of only the amount of transfer fees set-forth in the instrument treating it as the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 65 W.P. No.18026/2020 amount of market value for the lease:
Provided that in each case certificate shall be produced by the parties from the Collector of Stamps of the concerned District, where the land is situated, to the effect that the proper duty has been paid on the instruments on the basis of which the amendment in the lease was permitted by the Government or the concerned undertaking of the Government.
Note.- This exemption shall be applicable only till the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2010 as amended in 2012 or the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work plan remains.
11. On instrument of lease of sick/closed industrial units which are referred to the Board of Industrial Finance and Reconstruction (B.I.F.R.) or a liquidator or acquired by financial institutions or banks or which fall in the category of sick industry as defined by the Reserve Bank of India, subject to the conditions, that
(a) the remission shall be granted only once. The unit/assets on which exemption has been granted once, no exemption in any case shall he granted again;
(b) the remission shall be granted only to such closed and sick units in which the high power committee headed by the Chief Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 66 W.P. No.18026/2020 Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh or the Empowered Committee headed by the Collector of the District, as the case may be, constituted under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy 2010, as amended in 2012 or the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy. 2014 and its work plan has taken a decision to remit the stamp duty.
(c) to obtain remission, the lessee of the unit shall have to produce a scheme for revival of the unit before the Competent Authority explaining his financial position. Also the lessee shall give an undertaking before the Competent Authority that he shall revive the industry within eighteen months and in case of violation, he shall pay the amount of stamp duty remitted along with an interest at the simple rate of 0.75 percent for every month or part thereof from the date of execution of the instrument. For revival he shall be entitled to use the option of diversification of the product; and
(d) the remission shall be subject to the certificate of Competent Authority to the effect that the instrument is eligible for remission under this notification.
The Competent Authority authorized to issue the said certificate in the following manner, namely:
Value/market value of the unit -
competent authority Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 67 W.P. No.18026/2020
(i) Where it does not exceed Rupees One Crore - Collector of the concerned District
(ii) Where it exceeds Rupees One Crore - Divisional commissioners of the concerned Division.
Note.- This exemption shall be applicable only till the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy 2010, as amended in 2012 or the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work- plan.
12. On instruments of lease executed to acquire land in favour of member of a family displaced on account of the Narmada Valley Projects subject to the following conditions, namely:-
(a) a certificate from the land acquisition officer of the project area is obtained in which the total amount including the amount of compensation item wise of his land and other immovable properties, special rehabilitation grant, rehabilitation grant etc., is mentioned. But the amount of transport fee paid for self transportation of goods shall not be included:
b) the Agricultural land and/ or other immovable property is purchased by the displaced person any where in the State of Madhya Pradesh during the process of rehabilitation,
(c) the position in clause (a) and
(h) above is expressed in the instrument of transfer itself;
(d) the eligibility of exemption Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 68 W.P. No.18026/2020 shall be limited to the amount of Stamp duty chargeable on the value of land and/ or immovable property or the total amount of consideration paid to the said displaced person as compensation, special rehabilitation grant, rehabilitation grant, financial assistance etc., whichever is less:
(e) the stamp duty chargeable on the instrument will be reimbursed by the Narmada Valley Development Authority to the Commercial Tax Department on the basis of demand letter produced by the Sub-Registrar.
(f) only a displaced family as defined in the Rehabilitation Policy shall be entitled for exemption, and
(g) such landless displaced person and adult son, who want to purchase agricultural land and/or other immovable property from various amounts as Rehabilitation grant, financial assistance given to purchase productive assets, financial assistance given for developed residential plot at the rehabilitation place, shall also be entitled for the said exemption.
13. On lease executed in case of a cultivator and for the purposes of cultivation (including a lease of uses for the production of food or drink) without the payment or delivery of any fine or premium, when a definite term is expressed and such term does not exceed one year of when the average annual rent reserved does not Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 69 W.P. No.18026/2020 exceed one hundred rupees.
14. Stamp duty chargeable under this article is reduced to rupees one thousand on agreements executed by a State Government Undertaking giving right to collect tolls on construction of road, bridge etc. under the Build, Operate and Transfer (B.O.T.) Scheme.
16 Article-43 1. On instrument of conveyance of Mortgage mortgaged property executed by deed the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board established under the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board Act. 1960 in favour of any officer of the Government of Madhya Pradesh on the repayment of an advance received by him from the said Board for the purpose of constructing a dwelling house for his own residential use.
2. On instruments of mortgage executed by unemployed engineers to secure loans upto One Lakh Rupees from Madhya Pradesh Finanсе Corporation by the Commerce, Industries and Employment Department for running their own industry on the following conditions, namely:-
(a) The applicant or all the partners of the firm are either degree or diploma holder engineers, and
(b) His total income or the income of all partners or income of his/her parents does not exceed One Thousand rupees per month.
3. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 70 W.P. No.18026/2020 small scale Industrial units for obtaining financial assistance up to Rs. 7.5 lakhs from the Madhya Pradesh Finance Corporation.
4. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by a "New Industry" to be set up in the field of energy generation and mineral oil refining, for raising capital to act up the industry, to live 1.akhs rupees where the duty payable on such deed exceeds that amount.
Explanation-For this purpose "New Industry" means an industrial unit which has not gone into production before 19.08.1999 and is so certified by the Commissioner of Commerce, Industries and Employment or any officer appointed by him in this behalf.
5. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by industrialists or industrial undertakings in the State in connection with obtaining loans or advances for industrial purposes from the Khadi and Village Industries Commission and Madhya Pradesh Khadi and Gramodyog Board
6. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by industrialists or Industrial Undertaking in the State of Madhya Pradesh in connection with obtaining term loan, for the purpose of setting up a new industry, or for the expansion, diversification or modernisation of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 71 W.P. No.18026/2020 a industry from the Banka/financial Institutions to the extent as specified in the table given below:-
TABLE Class of the District/ Extent of remission/reduction of Blocks (as per Stamp Duty classification by the For Small For Medium and Commerce, Scale Industry Large Industry Industries and (2) (3) Employment Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh (1) Backward "B" 100% 50% Backward "C" 100% 100% Blocks which have 100% 100% no industry The aforesaid remission or reduction shall be subject to the conditions, namely:-
(a) The remission in case of small scale industry shall be given only in those cases where the amount of capital investment on plant and machinery exclusively is more than rupees Five Lakh and it shall not come in category of service or trade;
(b) the entire loan amount shall be spent for the development of the industry in the State of Madhya Pradesh, and
(c) a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the industry obtaining the loan is eligible for the remission or reduction of stamp duty, it to be issued by the Commissioner Commerce, Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 72 W.P. No.18026/2020 Industries and Employment, Madhya Pradesh.
7. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by a new unit expanded unit modernized unit of an information Technology/ Business Process Outsourcing company certified to be an information technology Business Process Outsourcing outfit by Information Technology Department or any designed agency notified by them under the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012 as amended in 2014 or the Madhya Pradesh Business Process outsourcing/ Business Process Management (Business Process Outsourcing/ Business Process Management) Industry Investment Policy, 2014 of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Note.- This exemption shall he applicable only till the operation of the Madhya Pradesh Information Technology Investment Policy 2012 as amended 2014 or Madhya Pradesh Business Process outsourcing/ Business Process Management (BPO/RPM) Industry Investment Policy, 2014.
8. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by agriculturists in favour of Banks for securing loans under the Kisan Credit Card Scheme.
9. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed by Self Help Groups in favour of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 73 W.P. No.18026/2020 Banks for securing loans for economic development of group members to the limit of rupees Ten Lakh under the NABARD sponsored schemes.
10. No stamp duty shall be chargeable on instruments of mortgage without possession executed in favour of Banks for securing loan up to rupees Ten Lakh for agricultural purposes by any Bhumiswami or a pattadhari holding land under Revenue Book Circular -IV-3-10. Also, no stamp duty shall be chargeable for this purpose upto any limit in case of a person belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
11. On instruments executed by herbal or ayurved bused industry in favour or any financial institution to secure repayment of loans obtained for industrial purposes, remission shall be subject to the conditions.
Namely:-
(a) the industrial unit is situated in an industrial area or industrial growth centre developed by the Government of Madhya Pradesh or the Madhya Pradesh Audyogik Kendra Vikas Nigam, and
(b) a certificate of eligibility in the effect that the industy is eligible for remission of stamp duty under this order, is issued by the Commissioner of Commerce, Industries and Employment, Madhya Pradesh.
Note.--This exemption shall be applicable only till the operation Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 74 W.P. No.18026/2020 of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2010 us amended in 2012 or the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Promotion Policy, 2014 and its work plan remains.
12, On instruments of simple mortgage executed by beneficiary in favour of any bank or financial institution for securing the repayment of loan or advance upto rupees One Lakh to be received by him for the purpose Of construction of house under the Mukhyamantri Gramin Awas Yojna, subject to the condition that a certificate of eligibility to the effect that the beneficiary is eligible for the remission of stamp duty is issued by the Collector of the concerned district.
13. On instruments of mortgage without possession executed to obtain Loans from Banks and Financial Institutions for setting up a new Food Processing Industry, that uses perishables items included in Annexure-3 of the Madhya Pradesh Food Processing Policy, 2008 as raw material or for the expansion, diversification or modernization of such industry in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
14. Instrument executed by persons taking advances under the Land Improvement Loans Act, 1883 (19 of 1883) or the Agriculturist's Loans Act, 1884 (12 of 1884) or by their sureties as security for the repayment of such Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 75 W.P. No.18026/2020 advances.
17 Article-46- On Note or Memorandum send by Note or a broker or agent to his principal Memorand intimating the purchase or sale on um account of such principal or a Government Security or a share, scrips, stock, bond, debenture, debenture-stock or other marketable security of like nature in or of any incorporated company or other body corporate, an-entry relating to which is required to be made in clearance lists described in clauses (a) and (b) of article 22. 18 Article-48- 1. On deeds of partition of Partition agricultural land between joint khatedars the chargeable stamp duty shall be remitted under following conditions, namely --
(a) There is neither any dispute nor any case pending in any court regarding the land to be partitioned; and
(b) The land being partitioned is not within the provisions of ceiling.
2. On such instrument of partition by which exclusively the agricultural land obtained in inheritance is partitioned amongst the members of joint family.
19 Article-53- On instrument of reconveyance of Re- mortgaged property executed by conveyance the Madhya Pradesh Housing of Board established under the Mortgaged Madhya Pradesh Housing Board Property Act, 1960 in favour of any officer of the Government of Madhya Pradesh on the repayment of an advance received by him from the said Board for the purpose of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 76 W.P. No.18026/2020 constructing a dwelling house for his own residential use.
20. Article-56- 1. On security bond executed by Security the surety of an officer of the bond not Government of Madhya Pradesh being a for the due performance of the Mortgage terms and conditions of the deed mortgage deed in Form V presented under the Madhya Pradesh Housing Board Act, 1960,
2. On security bond executed by any person for the purpose of guaranteeing that the local income derived from private subscriptions to a charitable dispensary or hospital or any other object of public utility shall not be less than a specified sum per mensem.
3. On security bond executed by persons taking advances under the Land Improvement Loans Act, 1883 (19 of 1883) or the Agriculturist's Loans Act, 1884 (12 of 1884) or by their sureties as security for the repayment of such advances.
4. On security bond executed by officers of the Government or their sureties to secure the due execution of an office or the due accounting for money or other property received by virtue thereof.
21 Article-57- On instrument of dowry executed Settlement on the occasion of marriage between Mohammedans, whether the deed was executed before or alter the marriage.
22 Article-60- On surrender of lease, when such Surrender lease is exempted from duty.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 77 W.P. No.18026/2020of lease.
23 Article-61- On transfers by endorsement--
Transfer (a) of a bill of exchange, cheque or promissory note;
(b) of a bill of landing, delivery order, warrant for goods, or other mercantile documents of title to goods;
(c) of a policy of insurance; and
(d) of securities of the Central Government.
24 Article-62- On transfer of any lease exempt Transfer of from duty.
lease Note:- For the purpose of this notification--
(a) a Banking Company as defined in the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 ( 10 of 1949) ;
(b) the State Bank of India, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955);
(c) a Subsidiary Bank as defined in the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 (38 of 1959);
(d) a corresponding new bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertaking) Act, 1970 (5 of 1970);
(e) the Madhya Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation Limited, Bhopal;
(f) Agricultural Finance Corporation Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013);
(g) a Regional Rural Bank established under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976 (21 of 1976);
(h) a Central Development Bank within the meaning of clause (b) of Section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Adhiniyam, 1966 (28 of 1966) or a Development Bank within the meaning of clause (d) of Section 2 of the said Act; and
(i) the Agricultural Refinance Corporation constituted under the Agricultural Corporation Act, 1963 (10 of 1963).
2. "Financial institution includes-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 78 W.P. No.18026/2020(a) Madhya Pradesh Finance Corporation;
(b) Madhya Pradesh Audyogic Vikas Nigam;
(c) a banking company as defined in the Banking Regulation Act, 1949(10 of 1949) ;
(d) State Bank of India, constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955);
(e) a subsidiary bank as defined in the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks} Act, 1959 (38 of 1959);
(f) a corresponding new bank constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of 'Undertakings ) Act, 1970 (5 of 1970); and
(g) a public financial institution as specified in the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013).
3. "Agriculture purpose" means making land fit for cultivation of land, improvement of land including development of sources of irrigation, raising and harvesting of crops, horticulture, forestry, planting and farming, cattle breeding, animal husbandry, dairy farming, seed farming, pisciculture, apiculture, sericulture, piggery and poultry farming and the acquisition and implementation of machinery in connection with any such activity except Truck, Mini Truck, Matador and Drilling Machine, By order and in the name of the Governor of Madhya Pradesh, RAVINDRA KUMAR CHOUDHARY, Dy. Secretary.
71. Section 9 of Indian Stamp Act, reads as under :
"9. Power to reduce, remit or compound duties.
-- (1) The Government may, by rule or order published in the Official Gazette, --
(a) reduce or remit, whether prospectively or retrospectively, in the whole or any part of the territories under its administration, the duties with which any instruments or any particular class of instruments, or any of the instruments belonging to such class, or any instruments when executed by or in favour of any particular class of persons, or by or in favour of any members of such class, are Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 79 W.P. No.18026/2020 chargeable, and
(b) provide for the composition or consolidation of duties or policies of insurance and in the case of issues by any incorporated company or other body corporate or of transfers (where there is a single transferee, whether incorporated or not) of debentures, bond or other marketable securities. (2) In this section the expression "the Government" means, --
(a) in relation to stamp-duty in respect of bills of exchange, cheques, promissory notes, bills of lading, letters of credit, policies of insurance, transfer of shares, debentures, proxies and receipts, and in relation to any other stamp-duty chargeable under this Act and falling within entry 96 in List I in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, expect the subject matters referred to in clause (b) of sub- section (1); the Central Government;
(b) save as aforesaid, the State Government."
72. From plain reading of Section 9 of Indian Stamp Act, it is clear that Section 9 is not a charging provision and it merely gives power to the Govt. to reduce, remit or compound duties. Since, there is no provision in proviso to Article 25 of Schedule 1-A of Indian Stamp Act, for charging stamp duty on movable property, therefore, the State Counsel is incorrect in submitting that 1% stamp duty can be charged on movable properties. Therefore, the stamp duty imposed by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi, on the movable properties of the Petitioner No.1 is bad in law and is hereby quashed.
Whether Upkar Cess @ 10% is chargeable on stamp duty
73. None of the parties have disputed the fact that Upkar Cess is chargeable on the stamp duty @ 10%. Therefore, imposition of Upkar Cess @ 10% on stamp duty is hereby affirmed.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 80 W.P. No.18026/2020Whether the Janpad Cess @ 1% is payable on the value of immovable assets or on Stamp Duty?
74. It is the case of the Petitioner, that in the light of the notifications dated 6-10-2018 and 25-8-2020, Janpad Cess @ 1% is chargeable on the stamp duty.
75. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for the Petitioner.
76. Since, this Court has already held that the "instrument" i.e., order of NCLT Allahabad was received in Madhya Pradesh on 29-6-2017, therefore, whatever Janpad Cess was payable on the said date would apply. Since, the Notifications dated 6-10-2018 and 25-8-2020 are subsequent to the relevant date, therefore, the Janpad Cess @ 1% on the stamp duty is not chargeable, but it is chargeable @ 1% of the value of the immovable assets. Therefore, the imposition of Janpad Cess @ 1% on the value of the immovable assets is hereby affirmed. Penalty
77. It is submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner, that while calculating the Penalty, the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi has also included the Upkar Cess and Janpad Cess, whereas penalty can be imposed only on Stamp duty. Further, no show cause notice was given to the Petitioner, thereby seeking an explanation from the petitioner no. 1 as to why the penalty may not be imposed.
78. Per contra, it is submitted by Counsel for the respondent, that the Collector of Stamps, has no discretion to waive or remit the Penalty. The rate at which penalty is to be imposed is already provided in Section 40 of Indian Stamp Act.
79. Considered the submissions made by Counsel for the parties.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 81 W.P. No.18026/202080. The Counsel for the petitioner is right in submitting that no show cause notice was given to the petitioner against the proposed penalty. However, in absence of any discretion with the Collector of Stamps to waive or remit penalty, this Court is of the considered opinion that the opportunity to show cause against proposed penalty would have been a simple formality with no power with the Collector of Stamps to waive or remit. The principle of Natural Justice has already undergone a vast change and unless and until the prejudice is pointed out by the aggrieved person, the order cannot be quashed on the ground of violation of Natural Justice.
81. The Supreme Court in the case of Nirma Industries Limited and another Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India reported in (2013) 8 SCC 20 has held as under:
"30. In B. Karunakar, having defined the meaning of "civil consequences", this Court reiterated the principle that the Court/Tribunal should not mechanically set aside the order of punishment on the ground that the report was not furnished to the employee. It is only if the Court or Tribunal finds that the furnishing of the report would have made a difference to the result in the case that it should set aside the order of punishment. In other words, the Court reiterated that the person challenging the order on the basis that it is causing civil consequences would have to prove the prejudice that has been caused by the non-grant of opportunity of hearing. In the present case, we must hasten to add that, in the letter dated 4-5-2006, the appellants have not made a request for being granted an opportunity of personal hearing. Therefore, the ground with regard to the breach of rules of natural justice clearly seems to be an afterthought."Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 82 W.P. No.18026/2020
82. The Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, State Bank of India and another Vs. M.J. James reported in (2022) 2 SCC 301 has held as under:-
"31. In State of U.P. v. Sudhir Kumar Singh referring to the aforesaid cases and several other decisions of this Court, the law was crystallised as under : (SCC para 42) "42. An analysis of the aforesaid judgments thus reveals:
42.1. Natural justice is a flexible tool in the hands of the judiciary to reach out in fit cases to remedy injustice. The breach of the audi alteram partem rule cannot by itself, without more, lead to the conclusion that prejudice is thereby caused.
42.2. Where procedural and/or substantive provisions of law embody the principles of natural justice, their infraction per se does not lead to invalidity of the orders passed. Here again, prejudice must be caused to the litigant, except in the case of a mandatory provision of law which is conceived not only in individual interest, but also in public interest. 42.3. No prejudice is caused to the person complaining of the breach of natural justice where such person does not dispute the case against him or it. This can happen by reason of estoppel, acquiescence, waiver and by way of non-challenge or non-denial or admission of facts, in cases in which the Court finds on facts that no real prejudice can therefore be said to have been caused to the person complaining of the breach of natural justice. 42.4. In cases where facts can be stated to be admitted or indisputable, and only one conclusion is possible, the Court does not pass futile orders of setting aside or remand when there is, in fact, no prejudice caused. This conclusion must be drawn by the Court on an Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 83 W.P. No.18026/2020 appraisal of the facts of a case, and not by the authority who denies natural justice to a person. 42.5. The "prejudice" exception must be more than a mere apprehension or even a reasonable suspicion of a litigant. It should exist as a matter of fact, or be based upon a definite inference of likelihood of prejudice flowing from the non- observance of natural justice."
83. The Supreme Court in the case of Dharampal Satyapal Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Gauhati and others reported in (2015) 8 SCC 519 has held as under:-
"20. Natural justice is an expression of English Common Law. Natural justice is not a single theory--it is a family of views. In one sense administering justice itself is treated as natural virtue and, therefore, a part of natural justice. It is also called "naturalist" approach to the phrase "natural justice" and is related to "moral naturalism". Moral naturalism captures the essence of commonsense morality--that good and evil, right and wrong, are the real features of the natural world that human reason can comprehend. In this sense, it may comprehend virtue ethics and virtue jurisprudence in relation to justice as all these are attributes of natural justice. We are not addressing ourselves with this connotation of natural justice here.
21. In Common Law, the concept and doctrine of natural justice, particularly which is made applicable in the decision-making by judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, has assumed a different connotation. It is developed with this fundamental in mind that those whose duty is to decide, must act judicially. They must deal with the question referred both without bias and they must give (sic an opportunity) to each of the parties to adequately present the case made. It is perceived that the practice of aforesaid attributes in mind only would lead to doing justice. Since these attributes are treated as natural or fundamental, it is Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 84 W.P. No.18026/2020 known as "natural justice". The principles of natural justice developed over a period of time and which is still in vogue and valid even today are : (i) rule against bias i.e. nemo debet esse judex in propria sua causa; and (ii) opportunity of being heard to the party concerned i.e. audi alteram partem. These are known as principles of natural justice. To these principles a third principle is added, which is of recent origin. It is the duty to give reasons in support of decision, namely, passing of a "reasoned order".
* * * *
38. But that is not the end of the matter. While the law on the principle of audi alteram partem has progressed in the manner mentioned above, at the same time, the courts have also repeatedly remarked that the principles of natural justice are very flexible principles. They cannot be applied in any straitjacket formula. It all depends upon the kind of functions performed and to the extent to which a person is likely to be affected. For this reason, certain exceptions to the aforesaid principles have been invoked under certain circumstances. For example, the courts have held that it would be sufficient to allow a person to make a representation and oral hearing may not be necessary in all cases, though in some matters, depending upon the nature of the case, not only full-fledged oral hearing but even cross- examination of witnesses is treated as a necessary concomitant of the principles of natural justice. Likewise, in service matters relating to major punishment by way of disciplinary action, the requirement is very strict and full-fledged opportunity is envisaged under the statutory rules as well. On the other hand, in those cases where there is an admission of charge, even when no such formal inquiry is held, the punishment based on such admission is upheld. It is for this reason, in certain circumstances, even post-decisional hearing is held to be permissible. Further, the courts have held that under certain circumstances principles of natural justice may even be excluded by reason of diverse Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 85 W.P. No.18026/2020 factors like time, place, the apprehended danger and so on.
* * * *
40. In this behalf, we need to notice one other exception which has been carved out to the aforesaid principle by the courts. Even if it is found by the court that there is a violation of principles of natural justice, the courts have held that it may not be necessary to strike down the action and refer the matter back to the authorities to take fresh decision after complying with the procedural requirement in those cases where non-grant of hearing has not caused any prejudice to the person against whom the action is taken. Therefore, every violation of a facet of natural justice may not lead to the conclusion that the order passed is always null and void. The validity of the order has to be decided on the touchstone of "prejudice". The ultimate test is always the same viz. the test of prejudice or the test of fair hearing.
41. In ECIL, the majority opinion, penned down by Sawant, J., while summing up the discussion and answering the various questions posed, had to say as under qua the prejudice principle : (SCC pp. 756-58, para 30) "30. Hence the incidental questions raised above may be answered as follows:
* * *
(v) The next question to be answered is what is the effect on the order of punishment when the report of the enquiry officer is not furnished to the employee and what relief should be granted to him in such cases. The answer to this question has to be relative to the punishment awarded. When the employee is dismissed or removed from service and the inquiry is set aside because the report is not furnished to him, in some cases the non-furnishing of the report may have prejudiced him gravely while in other cases it may have made no difference to the ultimate punishment awarded to him. Hence to direct reinstatement of the employee with back wages in all Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 86 W.P. No.18026/2020 cases is to reduce the rules of justice to a mechanical ritual. The theory of reasonable opportunity and the principles of natural justice have been evolved to uphold the rule of law and to assist the individual to vindicate his just rights. They are not incantations to be invoked nor rites to be performed on all and sundry occasions. Whether in fact, prejudice has been caused to the employee or not on account of the denial to him of the report, has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of each case. Where, therefore, even after the furnishing of the report, no different consequence would have followed, it would be a perversion of justice to permit the employee to resume duty and to get all the consequential benefits.
It amounts to rewarding the dishonest and the guilty and thus to stretching the concept of justice to illogical and exasperating limits. It amounts to an 'unnatural expansion of natural justice' which in itself is antithetical to justice."
* * * *
44. At the same time, it cannot be denied that as far as courts are concerned, they are empowered to consider as to whether any purpose would be served in remanding the case keeping in mind whether any prejudice is caused to the person against whom the action is taken. This was so clarified in ECIL itself in the following words : (SCC p. 758, para 31) "31. Hence, in all cases where the enquiry officer's report is not furnished to the delinquent employee in the disciplinary proceedings, the courts and tribunals should cause the copy of the report to be furnished to the aggrieved employee if he has not already secured it before coming to the court/tribunal and given the employee an opportunity to show how his or her case was prejudiced because of the non-supply of the report. If after hearing the parties, the court/tribunal comes to the conclusion that the non-supply of the report would have made no difference to the ultimate findings and the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 87 W.P. No.18026/2020 punishment given, the court/tribunal should not interfere with the order of punishment. The court/tribunal should not mechanically set aside the order of punishment on the ground that the report was not furnished as is regrettably being done at present. The courts should avoid resorting to short cuts. Since it is the courts/tribunals which will apply their judicial mind to the question and give their reasons for setting aside or not setting aside the order of punishment, (and not any internal appellate or revisional authority), there would be neither a breach of the principles of natural justice nor a denial of the reasonable opportunity. It is only if the court/tribunal finds that the furnishing of the report would have made a difference to the result in the case that it should set aside the order of punishment."
84. The Supreme Court in the case of Canara Bank and others v. Debasis Das and others reported in (2003) 4 SCC 557 has held as under:-
"22. What is known as "useless formality theory"
has received consideration of this Court in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. It was observed as under :
(SCC pp. 245-47, paras 22-23) "22. Before we go into the final aspects of this contention, we would like to state that cases relating to breach of natural justice do also occur where all facts are not admitted or are not all beyond dispute. In the context of those cases there is a considerable case-law and literature as to whether relief can be refused even if the court thinks that the case of the applicant is not one of 'real substance' or that there is no substantial possibility of his success or that the result will not be different, even if natural justice is followed see Malloch v. Aberdeen Corpn. (per Lord Reid and Lord Wilberforce), Glynn v.Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 88 W.P. No.18026/2020
Keele University, Cinnamond v. British Airports Authority and other cases where such a view has been held. The latest addition to this view is R. v. Ealing Magistrates' Court, ex p Fannaran (Admn LR at p. 358) [see de Smith, Suppl. p. 89 (1998)] where Straughton, L.J. held that there must be 'demonstrable beyond doubt' that the result would have been different. Lord Woolf in Lloyd v. McMahon has also not disfavoured refusal of discretion in certain cases of breach of natural justice. The New Zealand Court in McCarthy v. Grant however goes halfway when it says that (as in the case of bias), it is sufficient for the applicant to show that there is 'real likelihood -- not certainty -- of prejudice'. On the other hand, Garner's Administrative Law (8th Edn., 1996, pp. 271-72) says that slight proof that the result would have been different is sufficient. On the other side of the argument, we have apart from Ridge v. Baldwin, Megarry, J. in John v. Rees stating that there are always 'open and shut cases' and no absolute rule of proof of prejudice can be laid down. Merits are not for the court but for the authority to consider. Ackner, J. has said that the 'useless formality theory' is a dangerous one and, however inconvenient, natural justice must be followed. His Lordship observed that 'convenience and justice are often not on speaking terms'. More recently, Lord Bingham has deprecated the 'useless formality theory' in R. v. Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police Forces, ex p Cotton by giving six reasons. (See also his article 'Should Public Law Remedies be Discretionary?' 1991 PL, p. 64.) A detailed and emphatic criticism of the 'useless formality theory' has been made much earlier in 'Natural Justice, Substance or Shadow' by Prof. D.H. Clark of Canada (see 1975 PL, pp. 27-63) contending that Malloch and Glynn were wrongly decided. Foulkes (Administrative Law, Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 89 W.P. No.18026/2020 8th Edn., 1996, p. 323), Craig (Administrative Law, 3rd Edn., p. 596) and others say that the court cannot prejudge what is to be decided by the decision-making authority. de Smith (5th Edn., 1994, paras 10.031 to 10.036) says courts have not yet committed themselves to any one view though discretion is always with the court. Wade (Administrative Law, 5th Edn., 1994, pp. 526-30) says that while futile writs may not be issued, a distinction has to be made according to the nature of the decision. Thus, in relation to cases other than those relating to admitted or indisputable facts, there is a considerable divergence of opinion whether the applicant can be compelled to prove that the outcome will be in his favour or he has to prove a case of substance or if he can prove a 'real likelihood' of success or if he is entitled to relief even if there is some remote chance of success. We may, however, point out that even in cases where the facts are not all admitted or beyond dispute, there is a considerable unanimity that the courts can, in exercise of their 'discretion', refuse certiorari, prohibition, mandamus or injunction even though natural justice is not followed. We may also state that there is yet another line of cases as in State Bank of Patiala v. S.K. Sharma, Rajendra Singh v. State of M.P. that even in relation to statutory provisions requiring notice, a distinction is to be made between cases where the provision is intended for individual benefit and where a provision is intended to protect public interest. In the former case, it can be waived while in the case of the latter, it cannot be waived.
23. We do not propose to express any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the 'useless formality' theory and leave the matter for decision in an appropriate case, inasmuch as in the case before us, 'admitted and indisputable' facts show that grant of a writ will be in vain as Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 90 W.P. No.18026/2020 pointed out by Chinnappa Reddy, J."
85. However, the Counsel for the Petitioner is correct in submitting that while calculating the Penalty, the Cess payable under different statutes should not have been taken into consideration. Therefore, the Collector Stamps, Sidhi is directed to recalculate the Penalty by excluding the Janpad Cess and Upkar Cess. Conclusion
86.(a) Since, the instrument i.e., order dated 2-3-2017 passed by the NCLT, Allahabad was received in State of M.P. on 29-6-2017, therefore, the cap of Rs. 25 Cr. is not available to the Petitioners, as the same was notified by the State by notification dated 3-7- 2017;
(b) No Stamp Duty is payable on the movable assets of the Petitioner Company ;
(c) Upkar Cess @ 10% is payable on the stamp duty;
(d) Janpad Cess @ 1% is payable on the value of the immovable properties;
(e) Penalty is payable on the Stamp Duty and not on Upkar Cess and Janpad Cess.
86. For the reasons mentioned above, the Petition filed by the Petitioners is partially allowed and the Stamp Duty fixed/ascertained by the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi @ 5% on the value of immovable assets is upheld; the Upkar Cess @ 10% on stamp duty is also upheld; Janpad Cess @ 1% on the value of the immovable property is also affirmed. However, the Stamp Duty on the movable assets is hereby quashed. However, the matter is remanded back to the Collector of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36 91 W.P. No.18026/2020 Stamps for reassessing the amount of Penalty by not taking the Upkar Cess and Janpad Cess into consideration.
87. The Petitioners are directed to appear before the Collector of Stamps, Sidhi on 26 of August 2024 and the Collector of Stamps Sidhi shall decide the same within a period of one month from thereafter.
88. Accordingly the Petition challenging Stamp Duty @ 5% on the immovable assets of the Petitioner No.1 without the cap of Rs 25 cr., Upkar Cess @ 10% on stamp duty and Janpad Cess @ 1% on value of immovable assets of the Petitioner No.1 is hereby dismissed, whereas the Petition so far as it relates to Stamp Duty on movable assets and Penalty is allowed and the matter is remanded back on limited issue.
89. No order as to costs.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 12-08-2024 14:52:36