Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: CCRA in Vodafone Idea Telecom Infrastructure ... vs Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, ... on 20 December, 2023Matching Fragments
G. Whether the imposition of penalty is not disproportionate, excessive, unreasonable, illegal, and unjust, in the absence of any mens rea on the part of the Applicant which had itself presented the said instrument for seeking opinion of the Collector under Section 31 of the Act and which was within the time stipulated in the order of NCLT Ahmedabad itself?
H. Whether the CCRA ought not to have set aside the order of the Collector imposing penalty, particularly since the Collector has failed to assign any reasons whatsoever for imposition of the said penalty, and in absence of assignment of reasons by the Collector, whether the CCRA has not erred in supplanting its own reason to justify the imposition of penalty?
5. The argument of the Respondent that in its application before the CCRA under Section 53(1) of the Stamp Act, the Applicant had also prayed for certification under Section 32 of the Stamp Act and NEUTRAL CITATION C/SR/1/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 20/12/2023 undefined therefore the Applicant was seeking certification in addition to adjudication, is misconceived. The said prayer was made by the Applicant before the CCRA in the context of the application filed before CCRA after the Collector had already impounded the said instrument and passed an order under Section 39(1)
1. The CCRA has relied upon the proviso to Section 32(3) of the Stamp Act to uphold the Collector's action of impounding the said instrument produced for opinion under Section 31 of the Stamp Act.
2. However, such findings of the CCRA run contrary to its own stand before this Court that an instrument produced only for seeking opinion under Section 31 of the Stamp Act cannot be impounded by the Collector, irrespective of whether the same is produced before or after expiry of period of 1 month from the date of its execution.
19. 24.6.2022 Following the hearing before CCRA on 16.6.2022, the Applicant filed written submissions.
20. 28.11.2022 CCRA passed the impugned order, confirming the Collector's demand of penalty of Rs. 7,64,40,000/-.
Although no reasons for imposing the said penalty amount were assigned by the Collector, the CCRA observed that the said amount of penalty was justified in view of the lapse of time between the date of instrument and actual date of payment.