SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation || Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case || Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights || Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims || Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation || Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity || Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper || Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration || Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal || Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status

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 :