Madras HC: Police Superintendent not Liable For IO’s Delay In Filing Chargesheet or Closure Report || Supreme Court: Provident Fund Dues Have Priority over a Bank’s Claim under the SARFAESI Act || SC Holds Landowners Who Accept Compensation Settlements Cannot Later Seek Statutory Benefits || Supreme Court: Endless Investigations and Long Delays in Chargesheets Can Justify Quashing || Delhi HC: Arbitrator Controls Evidence and Appellate Courts Cannot Reassess Facts || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: ED Can Search Anyone Holding Crime Proceeds, not Just Those Named in Complaint || Delhi HC: Economic Offender Cannot Seek Travel Abroad For Medical Treatment When Available In India || SC: Governors and President Have No Fixed Timeline To Assent To Bills; “Deemed Assent” is Invalid || SC: Assigning a Decree For Specific Performance of a Sale Agreement Does Not Require Registration

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 :