UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Orders Sanctioning Schemes of Amalgamation are 'Instruments' of 'Conveyance', Rules Madras High Court; Strikes Down Part of G.O. on Stamp Duty Computation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Madras High Court in a landmark judgment upheld the classification of court orders sanctioning schemes of amalgamation as 'instruments' of 'conveyance' under the Indian Stamp Act, making them liable for stamp duty. The Court also partially quashed G.O.(Ms.) No.29 dated 01.03.2019, specifically its mode of computing stamp duty based on the aggregate market value of shares.

Brief on Legal Point: The judgment decisively interpreted the scope of 'instruments' and 'conveyances' under the Indian Stamp Act as inclusive of orders sanctioning schemes of amalgamation. It further clarified the State's authority in retrospectively applying stamp duty rates and delineated the permissible methods for computing such duty.

The petitions challenged the validity of the circular and Government Orders regarding stamp duty on court-sanctioned amalgamation orders. The primary issue was whether these orders could be treated as conveyances for stamp duty purposes and the legality of the retrospective applicability and method of computation of the stamp duty.

Instrument and Conveyance Classification: The Court affirmed that court orders sanctioning amalgamation schemes are 'instruments' and 'conveyances', thus subject to stamp duty.

Retrospective Application Validity: The Court upheld the retrospective application of reduced stamp duty rates as per G.O.(Ms.) No.47 dated 19.02.2020, asserting this within the State's legal powers.

Computation Method: The Court invalidated the part of G.O.(Ms.) No.29 that prescribed stamp duty computation based on 0.6% of the aggregate market value of shares, requiring legislative action for such a method.

Consideration of Stamp Duty Paid in Other States: The Court ruled that stamp duty paid in other states should be accounted for in Tamil Nadu's stamp duty calculation for the same instrument.

The Court maintained the circular on stamp duty for amalgamation orders and the retrospective application of reduced rates. However, it struck down the specific computation method based on the aggregate market value of shares in G.O.(Ms.) No.29.

Date of Decision: 19.02.2024

State of Tamil  VS M/s Serene Estate Private Limited        

Latest Legal News