9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1990 (4) TMI 53 - SC - Income TaxWhether the expression revenue officer in section 89(4) of the Registration Act includes a Tax Recovery Officer? Whether filing of a copy of the certificate in Book No. 1 within the meaning of section 89 is tantamount to the registration of the document under the Registration Act or it is totally different concept? Held that - There is no need to read the term revenue officer in any restricted sense and that it is wide and comprehensive enough to include the Tax Recovery Officer who effects a compulsory sale for the recovery of an income-tax demand We are, therefore, clear that, in the present case, the registration office has to act in terms of section 89(4) of the Indian Registration Act read with rule 21 of the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules. He should file the copy of the certificate of sale received by him from the Tax Recovery Officer in his Book No. 1. The copy of the certificate filed in Book No. 1 contains all the relevant details. These details are reflected in the indices maintained under section 55 which are open to inspection to all persons. (We may point out here that section 55(2) only refers to the memoranda filed but it seems clear, particularly in the light of various State amendments, that the index to Book No. 1 should also contain the details of copies of documents filed by him). These requirements are sufficient to ensure that any person intending to purchase or deal with the property is put on notice about the principal contents of the certificate of sale provided he inspects the relevant book and/or index. It is sufficient to say, for the purposes of this case, that all that the Sub-Registrar is required to do is to file the copy of the certificate in Book No. 1 and no more. He does not have to copy out the certificate or make any other entries in Book No. 1. These appeals have to be allowed in part. The Sub-Registrar is directed to file the copy of the certificate of sale received by him from the Tax Recovery Officer in his Book No. 1 as required by section 89(4) of the Act read with rule 21 of the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962. The petitioners are entitled to ask for nothing more. We express no opinion on the question whether any stamp duty or municipal transfer fees are payable in respect of the original certificate of sale. The appeals are, accordingly, disposed of.
Issues Involved:
1. Action to be taken by the Sub-Registrar when a copy of a certificate of sale is forwarded by the Tax Recovery Officer. 2. Entitlement of the vendee to request the Tax Recovery Officer to make entries regarding the transfer in his records. 3. Procedure to be followed by the Sub-Registrar when the original certificate of sale is produced by the vendee. 4. Liability of the certificate of sale to stamp duty and consequences thereof. 5. Payability of municipal transfer fees. Detailed Analysis: 1. Action to be taken by the Sub-Registrar when a copy of a certificate of sale is forwarded by the Tax Recovery Officer: The court referred to section 89 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, which outlines the procedure to be followed when sales are effected by courts or revenue officers. Specifically, section 89(2) mandates that a copy of the certificate of sale must be sent to the registering officer. Section 89(4) requires that the registering officer file the copy in Book No. 1. The court clarified that the term "revenue officer" is broad enough to include the Tax Recovery Officer. Therefore, the Sub-Registrar must file the copy of the certificate of sale received from the Tax Recovery Officer in Book No. 1. 2. Entitlement of the vendee to request the Tax Recovery Officer to make entries regarding the transfer in his records: The court examined whether filing a copy of the certificate in Book No. 1 equates to the registration of the document under the Registration Act. It was determined that filing and registration are distinct processes. Registration involves several steps, including presentation, endorsement, and copying of the document into the appropriate book. Filing, on the other hand, involves simply placing a copy or memorandum in the book without these additional steps. The court concluded that the Sub-Registrar is only required to file the copy of the certificate in Book No. 1 and not perform any further registration actions. 3. Procedure to be followed by the Sub-Registrar when the original certificate of sale is produced by the vendee: The court noted that the certificate of sale issued by a court or revenue officer does not need registration under section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act. However, if the original certificate of sale is presented for registration, the Sub-Registrar must comply with the relevant statutory provisions. The court did not express an opinion on this point as it was not directly at issue in the case. 4. Liability of the certificate of sale to stamp duty and consequences thereof: The High Court had referred to section 3, section 29(f), and article 18 of the Schedule to the Stamp Act, which generally place the liability to pay stamp duty on the purchaser unless otherwise contracted. The court acknowledged that the auction notice did not exempt the purchaser from stamp duty. The Tax Recovery Officer's letter suggested no stamp duty was payable, but this was inconsistent with the manual's guidelines. The court left the issue of stamp duty to be adjudicated if and when the certificate of sale is presented for registration or introduced in evidence. The court also outlined the procedures under sections 31, 32, 33, and 38 of the Stamp Act for adjudicating stamp duty. 5. Payability of municipal transfer fees: The court did not have sufficient details on the issue of municipal transfer fees and noted that its payability might depend on the payability of stamp duty. The High Court had not provided a separate finding on this issue. The court left the matter open for the petitioners to contest in appropriate proceedings. Conclusion: The appeals were allowed in part. The Sub-Registrar was directed to file the copy of the certificate of sale received from the Tax Recovery Officer in Book No. 1 as required by section 89(4) of the Registration Act and rule 21 of the Income-tax (Certificate Proceedings) Rules, 1962. The court did not express an opinion on the payability of stamp duty or municipal transfer fees. Each party was to bear their own costs.
|
