9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether stamp duty is liable to be paid on the basis of 'bill of entry' and whether such 'bill of entry' is a delivery order in respect of goods. 2. Whether 'bill of entry' constitutes 'an instrument' or "document by which any right or liability is, or purports to be created, transferred, limited, extended, extinguished or recorded" regarding the entitlement of delivery of goods within the meaning of Section 2(l) read with Entry 24 of Schedule-I of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 as applicable to Gujarat. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Stamp Duty on 'Bill of Entry' as a Delivery Order The court considered whether the 'bill of entry' is a document that entitles the holder to the delivery of goods and thus falls under the definition of a delivery order per Article 24 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. The court noted that the 'bill of entry' is primarily a document used for customs purposes to determine the necessity of customs duty and does not itself create any right or liability. The court referenced various legal provisions and precedents, including the Customs Act, to establish that the 'bill of entry' does not serve as a delivery order. It highlighted that delivery orders typically involve instructions from a bailor to a bailee to deliver goods to a named person, which is not the role of a 'bill of entry'. The court concluded that the 'bill of entry' is distinct from a delivery order and thus not subject to stamp duty under Article 24. Issue 2: 'Bill of Entry' as an Instrument Creating Rights or Liabilities The court analyzed whether the 'bill of entry' could be considered an instrument under Section 2(l) of the Bombay Stamp Act, which includes documents creating, transferring, limiting, extending, extinguishing, or recording rights or liabilities. It was determined that while the 'bill of entry' may be an instrument in commercial parlance, it does not entitle any person to the delivery of goods lying in a dock, port, or warehouse. The 'bill of entry' is a regulatory document used for customs clearance and does not function as a delivery order. The court referenced the definitions and legal interpretations of delivery orders and instruments, concluding that the 'bill of entry' does not meet the criteria for an instrument under the Stamp Act for the purposes of stamp duty. Judgment: The court upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge, with modifications. It clarified that the 'bill of entry' is not a delivery order and is not subject to stamp duty under Article 24. The court also corrected certain erroneous findings of the Single Judge regarding the nature of delivery orders and the applicability of stamp duty when names in the 'bill of lading' and 'bill of entry' differ. The appeals were disposed of with no order as to costs, and the judgment was modified to reflect the court's findings.
|
