2015 (12) TMI 571 - HC - Indian Laws

Court allows increase in share capital without fees, advises on stamp duty relief under Maharashtra Stamp Act

JIK Industries Ltd. Versus Union of India And Others

JIK Industries Ltd. Versus Union of India And Others - TMI Issues:1. Increase in authorized share capital without payment of requisite fees2. Communication set aside regarding email dated 24th April 20113. Stamp duty under Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958 on Articles of AssociationIssue 1: Increase in authorized share capital without payment of requisite feesThe petition sought a writ of mandamus to direct the authorities to permit the increase in authorized share capital without payment of fees, based on orders from the BIFR. The Respondent Nos.1 and 2, exercising powers under the Indian Companies Act 1956, agreed to take a decision within three months and communicate it to the Petitioners after considering all relevant materials. The court accepted this and directed the authorities to make a decision within the stipulated time frame.Issue 2: Communication set aside regarding email dated 24th April 2011The second prayer in the petition involved the State of Maharashtra and the Principal Secretary, Revenue Ministry. The court noted that the Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958 governed the matter of stamp duty on the Articles of Association of a company. The Petitioners were advised to make an application to the State Government under section 9 of the Act to claim remission or compounding of the stamp duty. The court directed that if such an application was made, it should be considered on its merits and a decision communicated within three months.Issue 3: Stamp duty under Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958 on Articles of AssociationThe court highlighted the provision of section 9 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958, granting the State Government the power to reduce, remit, or compound duties in the public interest. It was emphasized that no application had been made by the Petitioners to the State Government for such relief. The court instructed the Petitioners to address the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Maharashtra, for consideration of their application under section 9. Once the authorities agreed to the terms, the court stated that wider questions or controversies need not be decided at that time.In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of increasing authorized share capital without payment of fees, setting aside a communication regarding stamp duty, and the application of the Maharashtra Stamp Act 1958. The court provided directions for the authorities to make decisions within specific time frames and emphasized the need for the Petitioners to follow the legal process for seeking relief under the stamp duty provisions.