LexNEW CENTRAL JUTE MILLS CO. LTD. AND ORS. versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
f ' I ' ,I 1 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 535 NEW CENTRAL JUTE MILLS CO. LTD. • 1963 AND ORS. Januar.J, 17. v. ' THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. (B. P. SINHA, c. ].! P. B. GAJjiJNDRAGADKAR. K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. D.As GUPTA and J. c. SHAH, Jj.). , I Start:p J)uty-"Duly stamped"-Meaning qf-Mortga11e deed executed in Uttar Prade.h in respect of property in West Bengal-Duty pa11~ble on such instr-ument-Stamp Act, 18.99 (2 of 1899), ss. 2 \ii), !!_ (as amended in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal), s.19A, "· 3. · • The first petitioner, a Company with its register~ office at Calcutta, is the owner of a fac;tory al Varanasi in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The State of Uttar Pradesh h'\ving agreed -- - to advance a loan on the mortgage of the Company"s assets at its jute mills at Budge Budge and at Ghusuri, all situatr.d in \Vest Bengal, the dee<l of mortgage was executed at Lucknow in the State of Uttar Pradesh on March 22, 1957. To that deed, the petitioner affixed stamps of the value of Rs. 1,08,751/-· purchased from the Collector of •lamps, Calcutt!'. It was duly registered at Calcutta on April 5, 1957. On a reference made to the Board of Revenue, UtJar Pradesh, the.Board held that as the- mortgage deed dated March 22, 1957, was executed at a place within Uttar Pradesh it must bear, stamps issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government.- The Board also held that the Company ~as liable to pay Rs. 1,7(000/~ as stamp, duty on the document dated March 22, 1957. The petitioner fileda petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution challenging the order of the Board of Re.venue. The petitioner contended that the document should have been held to be dulY. stamped .as it bore stamps in accordance with the law of WesrBengal. Held, that the mortgage deed dated March 22, 1957, was executed in Uttar Pradesh, though it relat~d to property situated . in West Bengal and was received in the State for registration. The first dutiable event was the execution which took place in Uttar Pradesh. The second dutiallle cvent.wa> the receipt in West Bengal. When it came before the officers of Pttar Pradesh for a decision whether it was duly stamped or not, the officers of •• "I' • 196J Ntra U•tral }tJtt MUJs C.. Lti. •• Th S14u of West Bmgal 536 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1964] VOL· Cttar Pradesh were bound to hold that the instrument was not duly stamped as it did not bear Uttar Prades11 starnps. In the circu1nstances of the case, the fact that the instrunlent had stamps in accordance with the law of West llengal coulJ not justify a conclusion that it had been duly stamped. The instrument can be said to be duly stamped only if it be us stamps of the amount and description in accordance '"'ith the la\V of the S!a.te concern· ed. The law includes not only the Act bill also t'ic rules framed under the Act. rr an instrument af·er becoming liable to <luty in one State on execution there becomes liable to dutv also in anothrr State on receipt there, it must fint be stam~d in accordance with the law of the first State and it will not be required to be further stamped in accordance with the law of tbe second State when the rate of the second state is the samr or lower. Where the rate of the second S:atc i; higher, it wal require ta be stamped only with 1he excess a1nount in accorda11cc with the law and rules in force in ihe second Sta tr. C1v1L 0RJGIXAL Ju1us1Hc:T10N : Petiti,1n No. 13 of 1962. Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement or Fundamen1al Rights. 0. K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, and B. P. Maheshwari, for the petitioners .. B. Sen, 8. C. Mazumdar for P. K. Bose, for respondent No. 1. C. B. Ag'lrwal. K. S. llajefo and G. P. Lal, for respondents l\os. 2 to t · 'l'. V. R. Tr1taclU1ri and /'. D. Menon, for inter- vener No. I. B. Sen, and S. I'. l'arm11 for I. N. Shroff, for intervener No. 2. R. Sen, JI. S. K. Sastri and R. l/. Dhebar, for intervener No. ii. 1 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 537 1963. January 17. The Judgment of the court was delivered by DAS GUPTA, ].-Where an inst:ument extcuted in Uttar Pradesh and consequently liable to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act as amended in Uttar Pradesh but relating to property in West Bengal bears stamps overprinted with the name of West Bengal comes before a public officer of Uttar Pradesh, is such officer right in holding that the instrument is
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.