Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Sandeep Dwellers Private Limited, a construction company, entered into three development agreements dated 28.12.2020, 31.12.2020, and 31.12.2020, registered on 10.02.2021, 16.01.2021, and 29.06.2021 respectively. Before execution, the petitioner applied under Section 31 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 for adjudication of stamp duty, contending that the agreements were covered by a government notification dated 28.8.2020 issued by the Revenue and Forest Department, which reduced stamp duty on conveyances under Article 25(b) of Schedule I of the Stamp Act by two per cent for the period 1.9.2020 to 31.12.2020 and by one and a half per cent for 1.1.2021 to 31.3.2021. Respondent No.3, the Joint District Registrar-cum-Collector of Stamps, by order dated 18.12.2020, held that full stamp duty under Article 5(g-a) read with Article 25(b)(i) of Schedule I was payable. The petitioner paid under protest and filed the writ petition. The legal issue was whether the notification applied to development agreements. The petitioner argued that development agreements are akin to conveyances and should benefit from the reduced rate. The respondents contended that the notification only applied to conveyances under Article 25(b), not to development agreements under Article 5(g-a). The court analyzed the notification and the Stamp Act, noting that Article 5(g-a) specifically deals with development agreements and is distinct from Article 25(b) on conveyances. The court held that the notification dated 28.8.2020, by its plain language, only reduced stamp duty on conveyances under Article 25(b) and did not extend to development agreements. The court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claim.
Headnote
A) Stamp Duty - Development Agreement - Conveyance - Notification - The petitioner sought reduced stamp duty on development agreements under a government notification dated 28.8.2020 that reduced stamp duty on conveyances under Article 25(b) of Schedule I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958. The court held that a development agreement is not a conveyance but an agreement under Article 5(g-a) read with Article 25(b)(i), and the notification applies only to conveyances, not to development agreements. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 2-5) B) Interpretation of Statutes - Stamp Act - Notification - The court interpreted the notification dated 28.8.2020 strictly, noting that it specifically referred to 'conveyance' under Article 25(b) and did not include development agreements. The court held that the notification cannot be extended to instruments not covered by its plain language. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of reduced stamp duty under the government notification dated 28.8.2020 for development agreements, which reduced stamp duty on conveyances under Article 25(b) of Schedule I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of respondent No.3 dated 18.12.2020 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Stamp duty on development agreements is governed by Article 5(g-a) read with Article 25(b)(i) of Schedule I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act
- 1958
- not by Article 25(b) alone. A government notification reducing stamp duty on conveyances under Article 25(b) does not extend to development agreements which are distinct instruments. The notification dated 28.8.2020 applies only to conveyances
- not to development agreements.
