Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Purpose of Duty Fulfilled Once Document Is Presented for Execution: Telangana High Court Rejects ₹65 Lakh Stamp Duty Refund Request After Sale Deed Refusal

10 October 2024 12:25 PM

By: sayum


Telangana High Court dismissed a petition seeking a refund of ₹65,37,500 in stamp duty. The refund was sought after a sale deed was refused registration. The court held that since the stamp duty had already been utilized for the document's intended purpose, it could not be refunded under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

The petitioner, Amer Ali Khan, paid stamp duty for a property sale deed that was later refused registration. Despite withdrawing the registration proposal, Khan sought a refund, arguing that the duty had not served its purpose. The court ruled that once the stamp duty is used for the document’s execution, the duty is deemed utilized and is non-refundable.

Amer Ali Khan, a news editor, had entered into a sale agreement to purchase land in Shaikpet, Hyderabad. He paid ₹65,37,500 in stamp duty for the registration of the sale deed. However, the Sub-Registrar refused to register the document due to non-compliance with the Registration Act, 1908. Khan later withdrew the registration request and sought a refund of the stamp duty, which was denied by the District Registrar.

The main issue was whether the petitioner was entitled to a refund of the stamp duty after the sale deed was refused for registration.

Section 49 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, provides for refunds only in specific circumstances, such as spoiled stamps or unexecuted documents. The petitioner’s case did not meet these criteria, as the stamp duty had already been utilized for the sale deed.

The court stated that once a document is presented for registration, the stamp duty is considered to have served its purpose, and no refund can be granted, even if the document is later refused registration.

The court dismissed the petition, ruling that the stamp duty had been utilized and was not refundable. The decision upheld the order of the District Registrar, which denied the refund on the grounds that the stamp duty had already been used for its intended purpose.

The Telangana High Court’s ruling reinforces the principle that stamp duty, once utilized for the execution of a document, cannot be refunded. The judgment clarifies that refunds under the Indian Stamp Act are limited to specific situations, and a refusal of registration does not automatically entitle the payer to a refund.

Date of Decision: October 4, 2024

Amer Ali Khan vs. The State of Telangana

Latest Legal News