TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1754
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner : Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran, Adv., Ms. Charanya L., Adv., Mr. Aaditya Bhattacharya, Adv., Ms Apeksha Mehta, Adv., Mr. Victor Das, Adv., Mr. Manish Rastogi, Adv., Mr. Vikas Singh Jangra, AOR, Mr. V. Shekhar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Praveen Kumar, AOR, Mr. Rajiv Agnihotri, Adv., Ms.Babita Sant, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Adv., Mr. Pawanshree Agrawal, AOR, Ms. Abhipsa Anamika, Adv., Mr. Kuldip Singh, AOR, Ms. Uttara Babbar, AOR, Ms. Bhavana Duhoon, Adv., Mr. Manan Bansal, Adv, Mr. Alok Yadav, Adv., Mr. Harish Pandey, AOR, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. Dev Datt Kamat, Sr. Adv., Nishanth Patil, AOR, Mr. Javed Ur Rahman Adv., Ms. Uttara Babbar, AOR, Ms. Bhavana Duhoon, Adv., Mr. Manan Bansal, Adv., Mr Pai Amit, Adv., Mr Priyadarshi Ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere such return of re2 turns have been filed but tax has not been paid, such part of the balance which shall be equal to,- (i) thirty three per cent, where the default relates to one quarter; (ii) fifty per cent, where the default relates to two quarters; and (iii) seventy five per cent, where the default relates to more than two quarters; (c) fifty per cent of such balance; where a penalty under section 54 has been imposed; (d) fifty percent of such balance where the order appealed against has been passed under section 22 and a penalty has been imposed under the said section, and (e) twenty five per cent of such balance; in any other case, and (ii) by the Tribunal under sub-sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "16. A perusal of the said provision shows that when a document is produced (or comes in the performance of his functions) before a person who is authorized to receive evidence and a person who is in charge of a public office (except a police officer) before whom any instrument chargeable with duty is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, it is the duty of such person before whom the said instrument is produced to impound the document if it is not duly stamped. The use of the word 'shall' in Section 33(1) shows that there is no discretion in the authority mentioned in Section 33(1) to impound a document or not to do so. In our opinion, the word 'shall' in Section 33(1) does not mean 'may' b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....axing statute are clear, one cannot try to find out the intention and the object of the statute. Hence the High Court fell in error in trying to go by the supposed object and intendment of the Stamp Act, and by seeking to find out the hardship which will be caused to a party by the impugned amendment of 1998. 20. In Partington vs. Attorney-General (1969) LR 4 HL 100, Lord Cairns observed as under: "If the person sought to be taxed comes within the letter of the law he must be taxed, however great the hardship may appear to the judicial mind. On the other hand if the court seeking to recover the tax cannot bring the subject within the letter of the law, the subject is free, however apparently within the spirit of the law th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eventive) 1968(4) SCC 402 wherein this Court observed : "The right to appeal is neither an absolute right nor an ingredient of natural justice the principles of which must be followed in all judicial and quasi-judicial adjudications. The right to appeal is a statutory right and it can be circumscribed by the conditions in the grant." 24. In Anant Mills Ltd. vs. State of Gujarat 1975(2) SCC 175 this Court held that the right of appeal is a creature of the statute and it is for the Legislature to decide whether the right of appeal should be unconditionally given to an aggrieved party or it should be conditionally given. The right to appeal which is a statutory right can be conditional or qualified. 25. In M/s. Elora Construc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nconstitutional is not correct. 28. We may, however, consider a hypothetical case. Supposing the correct value of a property is Rs. 10 lacs and that is the value stated in the sale deed, but the registering officer erroneously determines it to be, say, Rs. 2 crores. In that case while making a reference to the Collector under Section 47A, the registering officer will demand duty on 50% of Rs. 2 crores i.e. duty on Rs. 1 crore instead of demanding duty on Rs. 10 lacs. A party may not be able to pay this exorbitant duty demanded under the proviso to Section 47A by the registering officer in such a case. What can be done in this situation? 29. In our opinion in this situation it is always open to a party to file a writ petiti....