- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Bombay High Court to resolve stamp duty issue
Bombay High Court to resolve stamp duty issue Partner at DSK Legal to assist the court as amicus curiae The Bombay High Court is set to decide on whether separate stamp duty is payable on the instruments executed during the redevelopment projects in Maharashtra. This pertains to the individual members on a permanent alternate accommodation agreement (PAAA). A bench of Justice G S...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Bombay High Court to resolve stamp duty issue
Partner at DSK Legal to assist the court as amicus curiae
The Bombay High Court is set to decide on whether separate stamp duty is payable on the instruments executed during the redevelopment projects in Maharashtra. This pertains to the individual members on a permanent alternate accommodation agreement (PAAA).
A bench of Justice G S Patel and Justice Madhav Jamdar framed the issue during the hearing of three writ petitions filed by Adityaraj Builders challenging the validity of two circulars of 2015 and 2017 by the Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Stamps, Maharashtra.
The circulars related to the payment of stamp duty on documents executed after the redevelopment of a property of a registered housing society was complete.
It stated that if a development agreement happened between the society and the developer, the stamp duty was to be charged as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Stamp Act.
Additionally, if there were separate document-transferring units to the individual members, those would be treated as independent documents. Hence, the stamp duty for the area approved for the society was to be charged against the construction cost.
The petitioner, a builder, approached the court as it had an estimated stamp duty liability of Rs.27 lakh per petition on the PAAA and was required to submit at least 50 percent of the amount to the department.
On the undertaking of depositing the amount and paying the balance based on the outcome of the petitions, the court permitted the petitioner to proceed with the registration of PAAAs.
Since the verdict on the petitions would affect a large number of redevelopment projects across the state (especially in Mumbai), the bench has appointed advocate Samit Shukla, partner at law firm DSK Legal, to assist the court as amicus curiae.