https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295965 An instrument styled as an Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement was held to be a bond because it created a direct obligation to repay principal with interest and enhanced interest on default, rather than merely acknowledging an existing liability. The agreement was attested by witnesses and was not payable to bearer or order, which supported its character as a bond under Section 2(c)(ii) of the Bombay Stamp Act. The contemporaneous receipt was treated only as evidence of loan receipt and not as the source of the repayment obligation. The contention that the document was merely an acknowledgment of pre-existing debt was rejected. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jun 2021 12:10:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295965 An instrument styled as an Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement was held to be a bond because it created a direct obligation to repay principal with interest and enhanced interest on default, rather than merely acknowledging an existing liability. The agreement was attested by witnesses and was not payable to bearer or order, which supported its character as a bond under Section 2(c)(ii) of the Bombay Stamp Act. The contemporaneous receipt was treated only as evidence of loan receipt and not as the source of the repayment obligation. The contention that the document was merely an acknowledgment of pre-existing debt was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295965