Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1504 - HC - Indian LawsRefund of excess stamp duty and registration charges - Rule 9(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 - HELD THAT:- If a direct question is to be posed, as to whether, a certificate of sale issued by a Court or a Revenue Officer, if evidence of a sale conducted by public auction requires registration or not, the answer has to be a firm 'no'. This would be the natural inference from a reading of the provisions. The other question that may arise is who is a Civil or a Revenue Officer, the term Civil or a Revenue Officer has not been defined either under the Stamp Act or under the Registration Act - It is pointed out that the bar that this question is no longer res integra. The earliest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on this issue could be found in SMT. SHANTI DEVI L. SINGH AND ANOTHER VERSUS TAX RECOVERY OFFICER AND OTHERS [1990 (4) TMI 53 - SUPREME COURT], wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court pointed out the procedure for filing of a certificate of sale issued by a Tax Recovery Officer and the Court after considering the provisions of Section 89(4) held that a Tax Recovery Officer under the Income Tax Act would be a Revenue Officer and the certificate of sale issued by him is not compulsorily registrable. In B. ARVIND KUMAR VERSUS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS. [2007 (5) TMI 657 - SUPREME COURT], the scope of Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act was considered and the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a sale certificate is merely an evidence of title and it does not convey title - The very same question arose before another Division Bench of this Court in THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND ORS. VERSUS KANAGALAKSHMI GANAGURU [2017 (8) TMI 1708 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. This court had held that the authorised officer appointed by the Bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, cannot be called a Civil or Revenue Court or Collector or Revenue Officer. In view of the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ESJAYPEE IMPEX PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASST. GENERAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CANARA BANK [2021 (1) TMI 1308 - SUPREME COURT], the law as it stands today is that an Authorised Officer, who conducts a sale under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, would be a Revenue Officer and the certificate issued by him in evidence of such sale, would be a document which is not compulsorily registrable under Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act. Amount of stamp duty and registration charges payable, if such certificate is presented for registration - HELD THAT:- Article 18 of the Stamp Act, provides for Stamp Duty payable on a certificate of sale granted by a Civil or Revenue Court or Collector or other Revenue Officer. Clause (c) of Article 18 makes the duty payable for a conveyance would apply to a sale certificate also. Under Article 23 of the Stamp Act, the Stamp Duty payable on a sale is 5% as per G.O. Ms. No. 46-CT and All Department dated 27.03.2012. The Writ Petition has to be necessarily allowed and the excess fee and the stamp duty collected will have to be refunded by the respondents. The Writ Petition stands allowed.
|