NCLAT: Consideration of Debt Restructuring by Lenders Doesn’t Bar Member from Initiating Proceedings || Delhi High Court: In Matters of Medical Evaluation, Courts Should Exercise Restraint || Delhi HC: Any Person in India Has Right to Legally Import Goods from Abroad and Sell the Same || Delhi HC: Waiver to Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act to be Given Once Tribunal is Constituted || Supreme Court Has Asked States to Regularise Existing Court Managers || SC: Union & States to Create Special POSCO Courts on Top Priority || SC Upholds Authority of CERC to Award Compensation for Delays || SC: Arbitral Tribunal Has Discretion to Include in Sum Awarded, Interest at Rate as it Deems Reasonab || SC: Cannot Use Article 142 to Frame Guidelines on Judicial Recusal || SC: Satisfaction Recorder in One EP Won’t Affect Subsequent EPs for Future Breaches

Chief Controlling Revenue Authority v. Costal Gujarat Power Ltd. and Ors. - (Supreme Court) (11 Aug 2015)

Number of transactions, not number of documents for stamp duty

MANU/SC/0851/2015

Civil

In a case where the mortgagor borrowed from 13 banks in one instrument, the agreement fell under Section 5 of the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958, the Court held. Though there was one instrument chronicling the transactions, the borrower had entered into 13 distinct loan agreements.

Relevant : Section 5 Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 Act The Member, Board of Revenue v. Arthur Paul Benthall MANU/SC/0002/1955

Tags : STAMP DUTY NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS ONE INSTRUMENT

Share :