High CourtsDivision Bench

Partner, M/S. Rama Lace Industries, vs Chief Controlling Revenue, Hyd., 3 Others,

Telangana High Court · Decided on 21 April 2022 · Citation: (2022) 04 TEL CK 0077

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ · Abhinand Kumar Shavili, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 — Section 35, 40, 45
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 1584 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 1,059 words

The appellants before this Court have filed the present writ appeal being aggrieved by the order dated 15.06.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.2152 of 2005.

The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appellants/writ petitioners have presented a document for registration under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short, “the Act”) read with the Indian Stamp Rules, 1925. He was demanded Rs.55,855/- as deficit stamp duty, Rs.7,585/- as deficit registration fee on agreement of sale and Rs.3,845/- as registration fee on sale deed. The appellants/writ petitioners, without protest, have paid the entire amount and the document was registered. Thereafter, an application was preferred under Section 45 of the Act for refund of the amount allegedly charged in excess and the application under Section 45 of the Act was dismissed. The appellants/writ petitioners came up before this Court and the writ petition was dismissed.

Undisputedly, the application preferred by the appellants/writ petitioners was under Section 45 of the Act, which provides for power to revenue authority to refund penalty or excess duty in certain cases only.

Sections 35, 40 and 45 of the Act which are necessary to decide the matter are reproduced as under:-

“35. Instruments not duly stamped inadmissible in evidence, etc. :- No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence for any purpose by any person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or shall be acted upon, registered or authenticated by any such person or by any public officer, unless such instrument is duly stamped :

Provided that--

(a) any such instrument shall be admitted in evidence on payment of the duty with which the same is chargeable, or, in the case of any instrument insufficiently stamped, of the amount required to make up such duty, together with a penalty of fifteen rupees, or, when ten times the amount of the proper duty or deficient portion thereof exceeds fifteen rupees, of a sum equal to ten times such duty or portion;

(b) where any person from whom a stamped receipt could have been demanded, has given an unstamped receipt and such receipt, if stamped, would be admissible in evidence against him, then such receipt shall be admitted in evidence against him on payment of a penalty of three rupees by the person tendering it;

(c) where a contract or agreement of any kind is effected by correspondence consisting of two or more letters and any one of the letters bears the proper stamp, the contract or agreement shall be deemed to be duly stamped;

(d) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in evidence in any proceeding in a Criminal Court, other than a proceeding under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898;

(e) nothing herein contained shall prevent the admission of any instrument in any Court when such instrument has been executed by or on behalf of the Government, or where it bears the certificate of the Collector as provided by section 32 or any other provision of this Act.

40.

Collector’s power to stamp instrument impounded:- (1) When the Collector impounds any instrument under section 33, or receives any instrument sent to him under section 38, sub-section (2), not being an instrument chargeable with a duty of twenty paise or half anna only or a mortgage of a crop (Article 36(a) of Schedule IA) chargeable under Clause (aa) or (bb) of Section 3 with a duty of forty paise only or a bill of exchange or promissory note; he shall adopt the following procedure:--

(a) if he is of opinion that such instrument is duly stamped, or is not chargeable with duty, he shall certify by endorsement thereon that it is duly stamped, or that it is not so chargeable, as the case may be;

(b) if he is of opinion that such instrument is chargeable with duty and is not duly stamped, he shall require the payment of the proper duty or the amount required to make up the same, together with a penalty of five rupees; or, if he thinks fit, an amount not exceeding ten times the amount of the proper duty or of the deficient portion thereof, whether such amount exceeds or falls short of five rupees:

Provided that, when such instrument has been impounded only because it has been written in contravention of section 13 or section 14, the Collector may, if he thinks fit, remit the whole penalty prescribed by this section.

(2) Every certificate under clause (a) of sub-section (1) shall, for the purposes of this Act, be conclusive evidence of the matters stated therein.

(3) Where an instrument has been sent to the Collector under section 38, sub-section (2), the Collector shall, when he has dealt with it as provided by this section, return it to the impounding officer.

45.

Power to revenue authority to refund penalty or excess duty in certain cases:- (1) Where any penalty is paid under section 35 or section 40, the Chief Controlling Revenue authority may, upon application in writing made within one year from the date of the payment, refund such penalty wholly or in part.

(2) Where, in the opinion of the Chief Controlling Revenue authority, stamp duty in excess of that which is legally chargeable has been charged and paid under Section 35 or Section 40, such authority may, upon application in writing made within three months of the order charging the same, refund the excess.”

In the present case, the application was preferred for refund of duty under Section 45 of the Act, even though Sections 35 and 40 of the Act were not at all attracted, nor it was a case of penalty which was paid under Sections 35 and 40 of the Act. Therefore, as the application itself was not maintainable, the same has been dismissed by the competent authority. The learned Single Judge was certainly justified in dismissing the writ petition.

This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. However, a liberty is granted to the appellants/writ petitioners to take recourse to the remedies, if any, provided under the law.

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.