Calcutta HC Disqualifies Politician Mukul Roy from Assembly under Anti-Defection Law || Supreme Court Bans Mining in and Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries || Supreme Court Terms Delay in Framing Charges for 4 Years in Maharashtra Case ‘Shocking’ || Kerala High Court: Widow’s Remarriage No Bar to Compassionate Appointment || Delhi HC: Child Care Leave Not Absolute but Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily || Bombay HC: Furnace Oil Not Part of ‘Plant & Machinery’, No Complete Sales Tax Set-Off || MP HC: Injury Not Required to Prove Attempt to Murder || Supreme Court: Tenant Must Pay Rent Despite Appeal Against Fixation Order Without Stay || Supreme Court: Counterclaim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Allowed Only Against Plaintiff || SC: Externally Procured Parts Given For Assembly, Not Used in Manufacture, Not Liable to Excise Duty

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 :