The Gujarat High Court held that the Stamp Authorities is not empowered to levy duty twice on same sale consideration for transfer of immovable property.
The appellant assailed the Order of the Single Judge and as per the claim of the petitioners, who are purchasers of certain plots developed by the land owner, the Agreement to Sale was a registered agreement with possession, and the entire stamp duty leviable on the sale consideration had been paid at the time of registration of the agreement.
The deed of Conveyance namely the Sale Deed had been executed by the land owner with respect to the said property. The impugned notice, under Section 33 of the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958, had been issued in a suo motu proceedings leading to passing of the order dated 22.04.2015 to pay deficit stamp duty as well as penalty.
Noticing the assertion of the petitioner that the entire stamp duty had been paid at the time of the registration of the agreement to sale with possession, the Court a pointed query to the AGP appearing for the State – Appellant as to the deficiency, which was the basis of issuance of Notice and it was argued that no stamp duty was paid by the petitioners at the time of registration of the sale deed and hence, notice cannot be said to be bad.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Anirudhha P Mayye observed that “The stamp duty was, thus, not leviable on the sale deed executed pursuant to the agreement to sale with possession as no stamp duty can be twice levied on the sale consideration with respect to one transfer.”
“Reference be made to Article 20 (cc), Explanation 1, which provides for adjustment of the duties leviable on the conveyance, in case of execution of a subsequent conveyance in pursuance to agreement of sale with possession, where stamp duty has been charged at the time of execution of the agreement. For the above, we do not find any merit in the appeal, both from the point of view of delay as well as on the merit of the claim of the appellant to levy stamp duty on the sale deed dated 30.05.2005” the Court noted.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
