Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption from stamp duty under the notification dated 26-7-2003 in respect of the sale deed executed for purchase of the sick industrial unit, and whether the subsequent rectification of the sickness certificate by the General Manager, District Industries Centre related back to cure the earlier defect.
Analysis: The unit purchased by the petitioner had already been declared sick and a sickness certificate had been issued before the sale deed. The only objection was that the certificate was issued by the Commissioner Industries instead of the General Manager, District Industries Centre. The Court held that the Commissioner Industries was a superior authority in the same department and that the certificate should not be ignored on such a technical objection when the purpose of the exemption notification was otherwise satisfied. The later rectification issued by the General Manager, District Industries Centre was held to relate back to the original certificate, and the exemption notification was required to be construed so as not to defeat its clear beneficial object.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the stamp duty exemption, and the adverse orders were unsustainable; the matter had to be reconsidered on the basis of the rectified certificate.