Stamp duty on court affidavits covers sworn and affirmed statements, with deficiently stamped affidavits liable to impounding.

The commentary explains that the State Legislature could validly amend stamp duty rates and bring affidavits used in court within the charging article after the required Presidential assent and notification. It further states that "affidavit" in the relevant provision covers both sworn and affirmed statements, so the charge is not confined to affirmed affidavits. A deficiently stamped affidavit is treated as an instrument chargeable with duty for impounding and can be admitted only on payment of deficit duty and penalty; once admitted, its admissibility cannot later be challenged on stamp insufficiency grounds.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the State Legislature had competence to amend the rate of stamp duty and make affidavits used in court chargeable with duty under the amended Article 4 of Schedule I-B of the Stamp Act. (ii) Whether Article 4 of Schedule I-B applies only to affidavits affirmed and not to affidavits sworn by the deponent. (iii) Whether an affidavit not duly stamped is an instrument chargeable with duty for the purposes of impounding, admission in evidence, and use in proceedings under the Stamp Act.

Issue (i): Whether the State Legislature had competence to amend the rate of stamp duty and make affidavits used in court chargeable with duty under the amended Article 4 of Schedule I-B of the Stamp Act.

Analysis: The fields of legislation relating to stamp duties are distributed by the Constitution between Parliament and the State Legislature, with the State having power to vary rates of stamp duty in relation to documents falling within its legislative field. The amendment operated only after receiving Presidential assent, which was necessary because the subject overlapped with a concurrent field. The amendment was brought into force by notification after such assent, and therefore had legal efficacy.

Conclusion: The amendment was within legislative competence and was valid.

Issue (ii): Whether Article 4 of Schedule I-B applies only to affidavits affirmed and not to affidavits sworn by the deponent.

Analysis: The expression "affidavit" is understood broadly in the relevant statutory framework, including a statement made either on oath or by affirmation. The reference in Article 4 to "including an affirmation or declaration" is clarificatory and not restrictive. It does not confine the provision to affirmed affidavits; rather, it shows that affidavits whether sworn or affirmed fall within the article. The charging provision therefore governs all affidavits used for the immediate purpose of being filed or used in court.

Conclusion: Article 4 applies to affidavits whether sworn or affirmed.

Issue (iii): Whether an affidavit not duly stamped is an instrument chargeable with duty for the purposes of impounding, admission in evidence, and use in proceedings under the Stamp Act.

Analysis: For the purposes of the operative provisions of the Stamp Act, the expression "instrument" is controlled by the charging scheme, and affidavits chargeable with duty fall within that scheme even if they may not answer the narrower definitional scope in every context. An affidavit chargeable with duty is therefore liable to impounding when insufficiently stamped. Such a document may be admitted in evidence only on payment of deficit duty and the prescribed penalty, and once admitted its admission cannot be questioned later in the same proceeding on the ground of insufficiency of stamp.

Conclusion: A deficiently stamped affidavit is liable to impounding and can be acted upon only in accordance with the Stamp Act's curative provisions.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the amended stamp-duty provision failed, and affidavits used in court were held chargeable to duty and subject to the ordinary consequences of non-stamping under the Stamp Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory charging provision expressly covers affidavits used in court, the term "affidavit" includes both sworn and affirmed statements, and an insufficiently stamped affidavit is an instrument chargeable with duty for the purposes of impounding and admissibility under the Stamp Act.

---