INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

(2.) As the pleaded facts would reveal, the petitioner is a Company engaged in a hotel business in various States of India, including the Taj Hari Mahal, Jodhpur, 5, Residency Road, Jodhpur. By an agreement on 16/4/1994 with the owners (Rani Mahindra Kumari and Rajkumari Prem Kumari) of land and the buildings and the structures thereon, situated at Residency Road, Jodhpur, the petitioner was granted permission to use the aforesaid land for the purpose of carrying on the business of hoteliering, and thus, sharing business profits on certain terms and conditions for 50 years. The said agreement was executed at Mumbai (Maharashtra), and the stamp duty was paid by the petitioner, in accordance with the Stamp and Registration Act of State of Maharashtra,.

(3.) Mr. Pallav Shishodia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Sunil Nath & Mr. Akash Shrivastava, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that at the time of execution of the agreement in question, the Act of 1899, as adopted, was in currency in the State of Rajasthan, and accordingly, the applicability of Sec. 3 of the Act of 1899 was limited to the instruments executed in the State of Rajasthan. Thus, as per learned Senior Counsel, the Rajasthan Stamp Authorities had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings to recover the alleged stamp duty on the agreement, as the same was executed in Mumbai (Maharashtra), and was thus, governed by the provisions of the Stamps and Registration Act, which was in currency in the State of Maharashtra, and in accordance with which, the stamp duty was duly paid.