Assignment of lease, not conveyance, governs stamp duty on stated consideration and bars market-value reference.
An instrument transferring leasehold rights was treated as an assignment of lease, not a conveyance or sale, because its character had to be determined from the substance of the lease covenants and reversionary rights. As a result, Article 63 of Schedule 1-B applied, stamp duty was payable on the consideration stated in the deed, and Section 47-A could not be invoked because that provision applies only where duty is chargeable on market value. On the facts, the relevant date for fixing consideration was the earlier agreement to transfer, since the transferees were not responsible for the delay in execution or registration.
Issues: (i) Whether the document presented for registration was a deed of assignment of lease falling under Article 63 of Schedule 1-B of the Stamp Act, or a conveyance/sale attracting Article 23 and enabling a reference under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act; (ii) whether, on the facts, the relevant date for determining consideration and market value was the date of the agreement to transfer or the date of presentation of the document for registration.
Issue (i): Whether the document presented for registration was a deed of assignment of lease falling under Article 63 of Schedule 1-B of the Stamp Act, or a conveyance/sale attracting Article 23 and enabling a reference under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act.
Analysis: The character of the instrument had to be determined from its substance and the underlying lease covenants, not from its nomenclature. The lease deed showed that the land was held on lease with covenants running with the land, a right of reversion in favour of the lessor, and limitations consistent with a leasehold interest. The buildings and appurtenances were also governed by the lease conditions, and the transfer executed by the parties operated as an assignment of leasehold rights rather than an outright sale of ownership. Article 63 specifically governs transfer of lease by way of assignment and, under the Uttar Pradesh Stamp regime, duty is charged on the consideration set forth in the deed and not on the market value. Section 47-A is attracted only where duty is chargeable on market value, which is not the position for an assignment falling under Article 63. The registering authority therefore had no jurisdiction to invoke Section 47-A on the facts of the case.
Conclusion: The instrument was a deed of assignment of lease governed by Article 63, and not a conveyance attracting Article 23 or Section 47-A.
Issue (ii): Whether, on the facts, the relevant date for determining consideration and market value was the date of the agreement to transfer or the date of presentation of the document for registration.
Analysis: The Court held that there is no rigid formula and the relevant date depends on the facts. Where delay in execution or registration is attributable to the transferee, the later date may govern. But where the transferee is not at fault and the delay is caused by the lessor or the authority, the consideration remains frozen on the date of the earlier agreement. On the facts, the transferees were not responsible for the delay, and the consideration had already been fixed when the agreement was entered into. In any event, since the instrument was an assignment of lease under Article 63, the market value enquiry under Section 47-A was not attracted.
Conclusion: The relevant date was the date of the agreement to transfer, not the date of presentation for registration.
Final Conclusion: The judgment under challenge was set aside, the transfer documents were held to be assignments of lease falling under Article 63, and the stamp duty basis was confined to the consideration stated in the agreement on the facts of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: For an assignment of lease governed by Article 63 of Schedule 1-B under the Uttar Pradesh Stamp Act, stamp duty is chargeable on the consideration stated in the instrument, and Section 47-A cannot be invoked unless the instrument is one on which duty is chargeable on market value.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
