9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (4) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April 14, 1988, a certificate of sale was issued by the Tax Recovery Officer to the petitioner. Under the relevant rules, a copy of the certificate of sale should have been endorsed to the Sub-Registrar but it was actually sent to the Sub-Registrar only on May 12, 1988. The petitioners in SLP No. 138 of 1990 purchased property bearing Nos. 112-113, Gautam Nagar, Delhi, at an auction conducted by the Income-tax Department. A certificate of sale in their favour was issued on May 23, 1988. A copy of the sale certificate was forwarded by the Tax Recovery Officer to the Sub-Registrar. The purchasers, thereafter, attempted to get the property registered by the Sub-Registrar in their names. The Sub-Registrar and the Collector of Stamps did not accede to this request apparently on the ground that this could not be done unless stamp duty was paid on the certificate of sale. On the petitioners' request, the Tax Recovery Officer also addressed a couple of letters to the Sub-Registrar and Collector which may be referred to here. With his letter dated May 12, 1988, to the former, the Tax Recovery Officer enclosed an extract from the Tax Recovery Inspectors Manual issued by the Income-tax Depa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t or order or direction to the respondents to register the certificate of sale and mutate the property in the name of the petitioner. The Delhi Administration and the Municipal Corporation were added as parties since they did not respond to the petitioner's request to effect mutation entries in the Corporation register, presumably on account of the petitioner's failure to pay the "transfer fees" leviable as additional stamp duty under the Delhi Municipal Act. The writ petition was dismissed at the stage of admission by the Delhi High Court. The learned judges passed a short order to the following effect: "Under section 29(f), read with Schedule I (article 18) and section 3 of the Stamp Act, the liability to pay the stamp duty is of the purchaser, unless there is a specific contract to the contrary in this regard. In this case, the auction notice is silent as to who is to pay the stamp duty. In other words, it does not create liability for the Government to pay the stamp duty. Hence the general provisions of law which are quoted above would be applicable. Dismissed." Each of the petitioners has, thereupon, preferred this special leave petition before this court. On the above f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tax Recovery Officer in his Book No. 1. In our opinion, 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. This takes us to the second question as to 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. The registration of a document under the Act is conditional on the fulfilment of several requirements (sections 32 to 35). The document has to be presented for registration by a person competent to do so. The persons executing the document should appear before the Sub-Registrar and admit or deny execution of the document. The Sub-Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o registration need to be got endorsed thereon from time to time as contemplated in sections 58 and 59 but this rule does not apply to a copy or memorandum filed under the Act. (iv) When a document is registered, the entirety of the document has to be copied out into the relevant book and the original document returned to the person who presents the document with necessary endorsements. This -requirement is absent in the case of a copy or memorandum which is just filed. (v) Where a document is registered, a certificate of registration has to be issued which will be admissible to prove the due registration of the document. There are thus some differences between the two procedures and this aspect has been touched upon in some very early decisions under the Registration Act, 1877: vide Fatteh Singh v. Daropadi [1908] Punj. Rec. Case No. 142, Siraj-un-nissa v. Jan Muhammad [1882] 2 All WN 51, Masarat-un-nissa v. Aditram [1883] ILR 5 All 568 [FB]. Reference may also be made to Premier Vegetable P. Ltd. v. State of M. P., AIR 1986 MP 258. We need not, however, consider for the purposes of this case whether filing and registration mean one and the same thing for all purposes and wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether it can be construed as a contract to the contrary binding on the Union for the purposes of section 29(f) of the Stamp Act. Sri Mehta requests that we may not now go into these questions but leave the issue to be decided as and when, the petitioners seek to have the certificate of registration registered or introduced in evidence before any court or authority entitled to take evidence which is at present a remote contingency. There are two provisions in the Stamp Act which provide for the adjudication of stamp duty. Under section 31, it is open to the executants of any document, at any stage but within the time limit set out in section 32, to produce the document before the Collector of Stamps and require him to adjudicate on the question whether the document should bear any stamp duty. The Collector, thereupon, may adjudicate on the stamp duty himself or refer the matter to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority of the State. In turn, it is open to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority to refer the matter to the High Court for an authoritative decision (sections 32 and 56). This procedure could have been followed by the petitioners if they wished to seek an answer to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer will have to comply with the relevant statutory provisions in this regard. However, this situation has not arisen as yet and it is unnecessary to anticipate it and decide the point. We, therefore, do not express any opinion thereon. This leaves for consideration the question in regard to the municipal transfer fee. No details have been placed before us on this issue. The payability of the municipal transfer fee perhaps depends upon the payability of stamp duty but our attention has not been invited to the relevant statutory provisions or their interpretation. The High Court has given no separate finding on this issue. We also express no opinion particularly since we are not expressing any opinion on the question as to whether stamp duty is payable on the certificate of sale or not. It will be open to the petitioners to contest this levy in other appropriate proceedings. For the above reasons, we are of opinion that 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 (Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
