<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (11) TMI 617 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175857</link>
    <description>Stamp duty on a sale deed executed pursuant to a decree for specific performance is assessable by reference to the market value prevailing on the date the sale deed is executed and tendered for registration, because stamping provisions require the instrument to be complete and duly stamped at execution. A sale deed is legally distinct from the earlier agreement to sell, and the valuation cannot be fixed by the agreement date or by the pendency of the suit. Litigation delay and hardship do not alter the strict construction of the taxing statute. The reassessment of stamp duty was upheld and the contrary view was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2015 16:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407978" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 617 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175857</link>
      <description>Stamp duty on a sale deed executed pursuant to a decree for specific performance is assessable by reference to the market value prevailing on the date the sale deed is executed and tendered for registration, because stamping provisions require the instrument to be complete and duly stamped at execution. A sale deed is legally distinct from the earlier agreement to sell, and the valuation cannot be fixed by the agreement date or by the pendency of the suit. Litigation delay and hardship do not alter the strict construction of the taxing statute. The reassessment of stamp duty was upheld and the contrary view was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>