9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #39;BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA SLP(C) No. 1742/2017, 36300/2016, 36305/2016, 36306/2016, 1743/2017, 36302/2016, 36294/2016, 36297/2016, 1741/2017, 4406/2017, 1740/2017, 36292/2016, 36298/2016, 4383/2017, 6381/2019 For the Petitioner : Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran, Adv., Ms. Charanya L., Adv., Mr. Aaditya Bhattacharya, Adv., Ms Apeksha Mehta, Adv., Mr. Victor Das, Adv., Mr. Manish Rastogi, Adv., Mr. Vikas Singh Jangra, AOR, Mr. V. Shekhar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Praveen Kumar, AOR, Mr. Rajiv Agnihotri, Adv., Ms.Babita Sant, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Adv., Mr. Pawanshree Agrawal, AOR, Ms. Abhipsa Anamika, Adv., Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR, Ms. Uttara Babbar, AOR, Ms. Bhavana Duhoon, Adv., Mr. Manan Bansal, Adv, Mr. Alok Yadav, Adv., Mr. Ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder appealed against relates have been filed and tax payable according to such returns has been paid, ten percent of such balance: (b) where one or more of the returns for the period for which the order appealed against relates have not been filed and tax has not been paid or where such return of re2 turns have been filed but tax has not been paid, such part of the balance which shall be equal to,- (i) thirty three per cent, where the default relates to one quarter; (ii) fifty per cent, where the default relates to two quarters; and (iii) seventy five per cent, where the default relates to more than two quarters; (c) fifty per cent of such balance; where a penalty under section 54 has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Stamp Act,1899 as applicable in the State of Andhra Pradesh. In terms of proviso said proviso, no reference can be maintained unless an amount of 50% of deficit duty was deposited by the party concerned. While considering the provision which is completely pari materia, this Court observed as under:- 16. A perusal of the said provision shows that when a document is produced (or comes in the performance of his functions) before a person who is authorized to receive evidence and a person who is in charge of a public office (except a police officer) before whom any instrument chargeable with duty is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, it is the duty of such person before whom the said instrument is prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Schedule to the Constitution. 19. It is well settled that stamp duty is a tax, and hardship is not relevant in construing taxing statutes which are to be construed strictly. As often said, there is no equity in a tax vide Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Firm Muar AIR 1965 SC 1216. If the words used in a taxing statute are clear, one cannot try to find out the intention and the object of the statute. Hence the High Court fell in error in trying to go by the supposed object and intendment of the Stamp Act, and by seeking to find out the hardship which will be caused to a party by the impugned amendment of 1998. 20. In Partington vs. Attorney-General (1969) LR 4 HL 100, Lord Cairns observed as under: If the perso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of these provisions has been upheld by this Court in various decisions which are noted below. 23. In Gujarat Agro Industries Co. Ltd. vs. Municipal Corporation of the city of Ahmedabad and Ors. 1999(4) SCC 468, this Court referred to its earlier decision in Vijay Prakash D. Mehta vs. Collector of Customs (Preventive) 1968(4) SCC 402 wherein this Court observed : The right to appeal is neither an absolute right nor an ingredient of natural justice the principles of which must be followed in all judicial and quasi-judicial adjudications. The right to appeal is a statutory right and it can be circumscribed by the conditions in the grant. 24. In Anant Mills Ltd. vs. State of Gujarat 1975(2) SCC 175 this Court held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould be entertained. The Supreme Court held that the provision did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution. 27. In view of the above, we are clearly of the opinion that Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act as amended by A.P. Act 8 of 1998 is constitutionally valid and the judgment of the High Court declaring it unconstitutional is not correct. 28. We may, however, consider a hypothetical case. Supposing the correct value of a property is ₹ 10 lacs and that is the value stated in the sale deed, but the registering officer erroneously determines it to be, say, ₹ 2 crores. In that case while making a reference to the Collector under Section 47A, the registering officer will demand duty on 50% of ₹ 2 cror ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
