<?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>2009 (4) TMI 1016 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200310</link>
    <description>Under the Bombay Stamp Act, a civil court&#039;s role on an insufficiently stamped instrument is limited to deciding whether the document is duly stamped and, if not, impounding it. The court has no jurisdiction to determine the deficit stamp duty or penalty itself, because that adjudicatory function lies with the Collector under the statutory scheme. Once impounded, the document must be forwarded for Collector adjudication, and only after compliance with the Collector&#039;s certificate and the statutory payment requirements can it be read in evidence. The impounding direction was upheld, but the order fixing the amount payable was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:12:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514704" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 1016 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200310</link>
      <description>Under the Bombay Stamp Act, a civil court&#039;s role on an insufficiently stamped instrument is limited to deciding whether the document is duly stamped and, if not, impounding it. The court has no jurisdiction to determine the deficit stamp duty or penalty itself, because that adjudicatory function lies with the Collector under the statutory scheme. Once impounded, the document must be forwarded for Collector adjudication, and only after compliance with the Collector&#039;s certificate and the statutory payment requirements can it be read in evidence. The impounding direction was upheld, but the order fixing the amount payable was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>