TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Shares Allotment Contract Not Conveyance: Stamp Duty Analysis</h1> <h3>The Secretary to the Board of Revenue (Seperate Revenue) Versus Madura Mills Company, Limited</h3> The court held that the contract regarding the allotment of shares did not amount to a conveyance, and the form filed was correctly treated as an ... Shares – Allotment of Issues:1. Stamp duty payable on a form filed with the Registrar under Sec. 104 of the Indian Companies Act.Analysis:The judgment concerns the stamp duty payable on a form filed with the Registrar under Sec. 104 of the Indian Companies Act. The case involved an arrangement between two companies regarding the allotment of shares. The original oral arrangement was later recorded in resolutions. The issue was whether the consideration for the allotment of shares should be treated as a conveyance and attract stamp duty. The Collector believed the reciprocal allotment amounted to a sale and thus required stamp duty. Reference was made to a decision by the Lahore High Court regarding agreements to convey. The argument was made that the transaction was not related to immovable property, but the definition of conveyance in the Stamp Act applies to both movable and immovable property.The argument presented was twofold. Firstly, it was contended that the allotment did not amount to a transfer of property as the company cannot be seen as the owner of its own shares. Secondly, it was argued that even if the transaction could be considered a sale of shares, it did not constitute a conveyance unless property had passed. The company issuing shares for the first time was seen as not transferring property to the allottee. The Government Pleader suggested that the company could be viewed as owning the shares it issues, potentially bringing it under the definition of conveyance. However, the court found it challenging to accept this distinction, stating that the issue of shares by a company for the first time did not involve the transfer of property.In conclusion, the court held that the contract did not amount to a conveyance, and the form filed was correctly treated as an agreement rather than a conveyance. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legal principles surrounding the stamp duty payable on transactions related to the allotment of shares under the Indian Companies Act.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
