CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY GUJARAT STATE Vs. HOUSING COMMISSIONER GUJARAT HOUSING BOARD
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
CHIEF CONTROLLER REVENUE AUTHORITY
HOUSING COMMISSIONER GUJARAT HOUSING BOARD
Click here to view full judgement.
B.K.MEHTA, G.T.NANAVATI, P.D.DESAI -
(1.) This Reference under sec. 54 (1) of the Bombay Stamp Act 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is made by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority at the instance of the Gujarat Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) and the following two questions are referred herein for the opinion of this Court :
(1) Whether the document would attract the benefit of remission granted under Government Notification Revenue Department No. STP/1462/80296-H dt. 17-1-1964. OR
(2) Whether the document would be chargeable with stamp duty as per the rates prescribed for the instrument of conveyance in Article 25 (b) of Schedule I of Bombay Stamp Act 1958
(2.) The facts giving rise to the Reference are few. In exercise of the powers conferred by the Gujarat Housing Board Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Housing Board Act) the Board has framed a housing scheme and constructed residential buildings in the Vadaj area of the city of Ahmedabad. The housing scheme is a hire-purchase scheme. An instrument which is entitled Conveyance Deed and which was to be executed by and between the Board as the party of the first part and one Shri Kurva Umarshi Jethabhai who was described in the instrument as the purchaser and as party of the second part was presented for adjudication to the Assistant Superintendent of Stamps Gujarat State Ahmedabad by the Housing Commissioner under sec. 31 of the Act and the officer was requested to give his opinion on the question whether any stamp duty was chargeable in respect of the said instrument. Under the said instrument a flat in a building comprised in the aforesaid housing scheme was to be conveyed by the board to Shri Kurva for a consideration of Rs. 35 0 which was the entire hire-purchase price of the fiat in question.
(3.) The contention of the Board before the adjudicating Authority was that in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sec. 9 of the Act the State Government had issued an order dated January 17 1964 remitting the duty chargeable under the Act in respect of instruments executed by the Board and that since in the instant case the instrument in question was to be executed by the Board no stamp duty was chargeable on the said instrument.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.