J&K&L HC Quashes 65-Year-Old's Detention, says Cattle Smuggling isn't Public Disorder || Karnataka HC Bars Denial of MV Inspector Posts over Experience with Non-Existent HGV/HPV Vehicles || P&H HC: Lengthy Incarceration alone is No Substantial Change for Repeat Bail Plea || Meghalaya HC Flags Amicus' Non-Appearance amid Lawyers' Strike, Stresses Loyalty to Justice || MP HC: Arms Act doesn't allow Sports Firearm Licence Conversion to Self-Defence Category || Delhi HC: Public Funding of LTC, CGHS Benefits doesn't Mandate Personal Disclosure under RTI || Delhi HC: Fake Caste Certificate alone cannot Justify Removing Advocate from State Rolls || Delhi HC Refuses to Stop Sale of 47 Law Books in Family Copyright Dispute || Supreme Court: S. 394 IPC Conviction Requires Proof of Robbery or Attempted Robbery || Supreme Court Questions MP HC's Cryptic Reduction of Murder Conviction as 'Shocking'

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 :