(1.) This is a reference by the Board of Revenue, Madras, the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, raising the Question of the chargeability of the proper stamp duty in respect of a document dated 5-9-1954, which came under the purview of the revenue authorities under the following circumstances.
(2.) Nidamurthy Narasimham and Surayya are divided brothers who were parties to a transaction embodied in writing and dated 5-9-54. Narasimham one of the executants of the said document presaited ' it to the Collector of Madras for assessment and levy of the stamp duty payable for that document. The Collector impounded the document under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, and calling upon Narasimham to file an affidavit explaining the various items of transactions referred to in the document which, On the face of the document, looked obscure and cryptic. Narasimham filed an affidavit dated 25-2-1955 the contents of which were not really helpful in determining the chargeable stamp duty. The Collector classified the document as a deed of partition under Article 38 of Schedule 1-A of the Stamp Act and also as a conveyance under Article 19, Schedule 1-A of the Act and levied a stamp duty of Rs. 3939 and a penalty of Rs. 70. The Board of Revenue -- the referring authority --agreed with this view of the : Collector. Thereupon the above reference to this, court has been made under Section 57 of the Stamp Act.
(3.) The reference came on for bearing in the first instance before three learned Judges of this court, Rajagopalan, Offg. Chief Justice, Ramaswami and Rajagopala Aiyangar JJ. The learned Judges were of opinion that it was necessary to have further details regarding the particulars and items of transactions disclosed in the document before the reference can be answered and accordingly directed the Board of Revenue to submit a further and fuller statement of the case. The executants of the document were given opportunity to place before the Board of Revenue further evidence in regard to the nature of the items set out in the document. The further statement by the Board was directed to be submitted within three months from 18-11-1957 the date of the order of this court.