Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

23. If the intention of parites were to evade the tax, there would not have been any transaction even after registering the sale deeds and certain accounts, cash transactions also brought in the Ledger Account of the 1 st Respondent. E-mail correspondence between the parties also exchanged. If the intention of the parties particularly, the claimant was to evade tax, there was no necessity to exchange the e-mail correspondence. If the intention of the parties were to conceal the amount as a prudent man 1st Respondent would not have recorded the cash transaction in the Ledger Ex.A.75. All these facts clearly indicate that as held by the learned Arbitrator the parties have never intended to evade tax. Certainly, the Claimants have no intention to evade tax. However, Respondent have taken advantage to  O.P.No.546 of 2020 and Arb.O.P.(Comm.) No.87 of 2021 conseal the real market value while registering the property. Merely because the true value has not reflected in the sale deed that may not be a ground to set aside the entire sale. Only for the prevention of the under valuation necessary safe gaurd has been made under the law in Section 47-A of the Tamil Nadu Stamp Act. If the registering authority has reason to believe that the market value of the property which is the subject matter of conveyance has not been truely set forth in the instrument he may after registering such instrument refer the same to the Collector for determination of the market value of the property and proper duty thereon. Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act provides for the procedure for collection of deficit stamp duty. However, in this case the registering authority has not initiated any action.

24. Be that as it may. Merely because the purchaser has not set forth true market value in the conveyance, same cannot be fitted against the claimant merely on the ground that they have agreed certain cash payments to contend that the entire contract is tainted with illegality and opposed to public policy. It is also relevant to note that the agreement to evade stamp duty is certainly within the knowlege of the Petitioner/1st Respondent for which the Respondent may not be  O.P.No.546 of 2020 and Arb.O.P.(Comm.) No.87 of 2021 found fault. Though they are party to the agreement they are less guilty. As long as there is no evidence to show that they are not intended to evade tax certainly intended to recover the admitteed price money for the sale of the entire 9.80 Acres orignally agreed in the Memorandum.