<?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>2026 (2) TMI 1112 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786964</link>
    <description>Stamp duty on a composite amalgamation scheme is chargeable on the NCLT sanction order as the operative instrument, not on the underlying commercial steps. Section 5 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act cannot be used to split one composite amalgamation order into separate taxable transactions for enhanced duty. The authorities also could not assess duty on an NCLT order from Chennai merely because it was referred to in the Mumbai order, so the attempted levy on the out-of-State order was unsustainable and refund relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2026 08:36:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887718" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1112 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786964</link>
      <description>Stamp duty on a composite amalgamation scheme is chargeable on the NCLT sanction order as the operative instrument, not on the underlying commercial steps. Section 5 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act cannot be used to split one composite amalgamation order into separate taxable transactions for enhanced duty. The authorities also could not assess duty on an NCLT order from Chennai merely because it was referred to in the Mumbai order, so the attempted levy on the out-of-State order was unsustainable and refund relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>