SUHAS DAMODAR SATHE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case raises an important question under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958: How does one distinguish between an instrument of conveyance and a development agreement for the purpose of stamp duty?

(2.) The petitioner has instituted the present Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the legality, validity, and propriety of the judgment and order dtd. 3/6/2017 passed by Respondent No.2 in the purported exercise of powers conferred under Sec. 53A of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Stamp Act"). By the impugned judgment and order, Respondent No.2 dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner, which challenged the earlier order dtd. 25/2/2016 passed by the Joint District Registrar Class-I and Collector of Stamps (hereinafter referred to as "the Collector of Stamps"). In the said order, the petitioner was directed to remit a deficit stamp duty of Rs.5,84,900.00 pursuant to the Audit Objection Report submitted by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. Furthermore, the petitioner was saddled with a penalty of Rs.11,69,800.00, on the premise that the instrument in question is governed by Article 25 of the Schedule to the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, rather than Article 5(g-a).

(3.) The material facts and circumstances giving rise to the present Writ Petition, in brief, are set out hereinbelow for the sake of clarity and convenience.