Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

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