Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

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        

Similar News