Differential stamp duty on verified copies of out-of-State instruments upheld as a valid anti-evasion levy

Section 7 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 was construed with section 19 as an anti-evasion measure authorising differential stamp duty when a verified copy of an instrument executed outside Maharashtra is received in the State in relation to property or transactions there. The charge was treated as arising from receipt of the copy, not from the copy as an isolated document, and the Court held that a verified copy filed under the Companies Act could have legal efficacy as an instrument for this purpose. The contention that the levy lacked legislative competence or was directed merely at a copy without legal significance was rejected, and the provision was held valid and applicable.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 7 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 authorises levy of stamp duty on a copy of an instrument received in the State, and whether such levy is beyond legislative competence.

Analysis: Section 7 was construed with section 19 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 as part of a scheme to prevent evasion of stamp duty where an instrument executed in another State is later received in Maharashtra in relation to property or transactions in the State. The charge is not on the copy as an independent document in isolation, but on the receipt of the copy as the event attracting the statutory obligation to pay the difference between the duty already paid elsewhere and the duty payable in Maharashtra. The filing of the instrument or verified copy under section 125 of the Companies Act, 1956 was held to be a legal requirement with consequences under the company law scheme, and a verified copy created or evidencing the charge was treated as having the character of an instrument. The Court rejected the contention that the provision merely targeted a copy without legal significance or that it lacked competence under the constitutional entry relating to stamp duties.

Conclusion: Section 7 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 was held valid and applicable to the verified copy of the instrument, and the demand for differential stamp duty was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory provision imposing differential stamp duty on a verified copy of an out-of-State instrument is valid where the copy's receipt in the State is part of a broader anti-evasion scheme and the copy has legal efficacy in relation to the underlying charge.

---