Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.34 seconds)Section 27 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Section 75 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Agra City Real Estate Development ... vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 13 August, 2003
We may also note at this stage that the decision of the Division Bench in Kaka Singh (supra) was followed by another Division Bench of this Court in Agra City Real Estate Development Organisation vs. State of U.P. and others, where it was held as follows:
Ramesh Chand Bansal & Ors vs District Magistrate/Collector ... on 11 May, 1999
In Ramesh Chand Bansal and others vs. District Magistrate/Collector, Ghaziabad and others, the Supreme Court held as follows:
State Of U.P. & Ors vs Ambrish Tandon & Anr on 20 January, 2012
The fact that the land was put to a particular use, say for instance a commercial purpose at a later point in time, may not be a relevant criterion for deciding the value for the purpose of stamp duty, as held by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. and others vs. Ambrish Tandon and another. This is because the nature of the user is relateable to the date of purchase which is relevant for the purpose of computing the stamp duty. Where, however, the potential of the land can be assessed on the date of the execution of the instrument itself, that is clearly a circumstance which is relevant and germane to the determination of the true market value. At the same time, the exercise before the Collector has to be based on adequate material and cannot be a matter of hypothesis or surmise. The Collector must have material on the record to the effect that there has been a change of use or other contemporaneous sale deeds in respect of the adjacent areas that would have a bearing on the market value of the property which is under consideration. The Collector, therefore, would be within jurisdiction in referring to exemplars or comparable sale instances which have a bearing on the true market value of the property which is required to be assessed. If the sale instances are comparable, they would also reflect the potentiality of the land which would be taken into consideration in a price agreed upon between a vendor and a purchaser.
R. Sai Bharathi vs J. Jayalalitha & Ors on 24 November, 2003
Apex Court in the case of R. Sai Bharathi Vs. J. Jayalalitha and others, 2004 (2) SCC, held as follows;
The Haryana State Agricultural ... vs Sadhu Ram [Alongwith Civil Appeal No. ... on 8 April, 2008
Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Manoj Kumar, Civil Appeal No. 2226 of 2010, decided on 9.3.2010, while allowing the appeal preferred on behalf of State of Haryana mentioned, while considering akin provisions, that in order to ensure that there is no evasion of stamp duty, circle rates are fixed from time to time and the notification is issued to the said effect. The issuance of said notification has become imperative to arrest the tendency of evading the payment of actual stamp duty. It is matter of common knowledge that usually the circle rate or collector rate is lower than prevalent actual market rate but to ensure registration of sale deed at least at the circle rates such notifications are issued.