Allahabad HC: Police Report in Non-Cognizable Offence is a Complaint; Accused Must Be Heard First || Kerala HC: Hospitals Must Display Rates and Cannot Deny Emergency Care For Lack of Advance Payment || Orissa HC: Convict’s Refusal to Appeal Through Legal Aid Must be Recorded in Writing || SC Halts Deer Translocation From Delhi’s AN Jha Park And Orders a Probe into DDA Negligence || Supreme Court: The Growing Trend of Succeeding Benches Overturning Earlier Judgments is Troubling || SC: Administrative Orders Must be Based on Stated Reasons and Cannot Add New Grounds Later || HP HC: Mixing Contraband Pouches Before Sampling Raises Serious Doubts About Accused's Possession || Bombay HC: Drug Names Using International Non-Proprietary Names Cannot be Monopolized || Delhi High Court: Assets From Illegal Cricket Betting are Proceeds of Crime Attachable by ED || Delhi HC: Extension to Issue SCN U/S 110 of The Customs Act Must be Granted Before Six Months Expire

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 :