https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466838 Section 31 adjudication of stamp duty does not authorise impounding under Section 33 at that stage, and the Collector's use of impounding power was rejected. For non-listed companies under Article 20(d), market value is fixed by the deeming rule at face value, so share premium cannot be added by implication. A revised notice correcting the demand before final adjudication was upheld, but penalty was unsustainable on the facts. A single composite amalgamation scheme was not split into separate matters for Section 5. Duty already paid in another State attracted statutory set-off under Section 19. On immovable property, the demand was sustained for land, building, and plant and machinery, but not for capital work in progress. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 22 Feb 2026 22:48:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466838 Section 31 adjudication of stamp duty does not authorise impounding under Section 33 at that stage, and the Collector's use of impounding power was rejected. For non-listed companies under Article 20(d), market value is fixed by the deeming rule at face value, so share premium cannot be added by implication. A revised notice correcting the demand before final adjudication was upheld, but penalty was unsustainable on the facts. A single composite amalgamation scheme was not split into separate matters for Section 5. Duty already paid in another State attracted statutory set-off under Section 19. On immovable property, the demand was sustained for land, building, and plant and machinery, but not for capital work in progress. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466838