LAWS(BOM)-2022-5-130

SANDEEP DWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On May 05, 2022
Sandeep Dwellers Private Limited Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

(2.) The petitioner is a company carrying on business of construction of buildings in and around Nagpur. The petitioner had entered into three development agreements on 28/12/2020, 31/12/2020 and 31/12/2020, which were registered on 10/2/2021, 16/1/2021 and 29/6/2021 respectively. Before execution of the development agreements, the petitioner made an application under Sec. 31 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (for short "Stamp Act") for adjudicating upon the stamp duty chargeable on the development agreements. It was the contention of the petitioner that since the development agreements were covered by government notification dtd. 28/8/2020 issued by Revenue and Forest Department which reduced stamp duty chargeable on conveyance as per Article 25(b) of Schedule I of the Stamp Act, the development agreements were liable to be charged with lesser stamp duty. The notification dtd. 28/8/2020 had reduced the stamp duty chargeable on conveyance under Article 25(b) by two per cent for the period between 1/9/2020 to 31/12/2020 and by one and half per cent for the period from 1/1/2021 to 31/3/2021. This contention of the petitioner, however, was not accepted by respondent No.3 and by his order passed on 18/12/2020, respondent No.3 held that full stamp duty as is prescribed under Schedule I of the Stamp Act would have to be paid by the petitioner. The petitioner abided by the adjudication and went ahead to execute the agreements on the dates mentioned earlier. They were also eventually registered as stated earlier.

(3.) By this petition, the petitioner is questioning the legality and correctness of the impugned order dtd. 18/12/2020 passed by respondent No.3 and is also claiming refund of the amount of Rs.23,03,810.00 which the petitioner maintains to have been paid by it in excess of the requirement of law. The petitioner is also claiming interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the said amount.