Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
The dominant issue was whether a single mortgage deed securing repayment under multiple loan agreements attracted stamp duty under Section 4 (one transaction) or Section 5 (several distinct matters) of the Stamp Act. The court held Section 4 requires commonality of a single transaction, whereas Section 5 applies where distinct transactions are embodied in one instrument, requiring aggregate duty as if separate instruments existed. As the four loan agreements imposed separate obligations and constituted independent transactions, execution of one consolidated mortgage deed could not convert them into a common transaction; duty was correctly assessed separately for each loan, along with deficit consequences. The challenge to the revisional order was rejected and the petition was dismissed. - HC
The dominant issue was whether a single mortgage deed securing repayment under multiple loan agreements attracted stamp duty under Section 4 (one transaction) or Section 5 (several distinct matters) of the Stamp Act. The court held Section 4 requires commonality of a single transaction, whereas Section 5 applies where distinct transactions are embodied in one instrument, requiring aggregate duty as if separate instruments existed. As the four loan agreements imposed separate obligations and constituted independent transactions, execution of one consolidated mortgage deed could not convert them into a common transaction; duty was correctly assessed separately for each loan, along with deficit consequences. The challenge to the revisional order was rejected and the petition was dismissed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
