The petitioner challenged the rejection of his refund application for stamp duty paid on an Agreement to Sale, which was canceled due to disputes and financial issues. The court ruled that the refund application was filed within the time limits prescribed under Section 48(1) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, including the amended proviso by Mah.5 of 2010. The rejection by authorities was erroneous, and the petitioner was entitled to the refund.

Para 1 - Background of the Case:
The petition challenges the rejection of the petitioner’s application for a refund of Rs. 95,100/- in stamp duty paid on an Agreement to Sale executed on June 11, 2009, which was later canceled.

Para 2 - Execution of Agreement & Cancellation:
The Agreement to Sale between the petitioner and Mr. Jagtap was for a flat costing Rs.18,50,000/-, with a stamp duty of Rs.95,100/-. Due to disputes and the petitioner’s inability to arrange finances, the agreement was canceled on March 15, 2010.

Para 3 - Rejection of Refund by Authorities:
Authorities rejected the refund application on the ground that it was filed beyond the six-month limit as per Section 48(1) of the Bombay Stamp Act.

Para 4 - Petitioner's Argument:
The petitioner argued that under the proviso to Section 48(1) (amended by Mah.5 of 2010), the application was made within two years of the cancellation deed. Alternatively, even under the pre-amendment six-month limit, the application was timely as it was filed on April 26, 2010.

Para 5 - Respondent’s Argument:
The respondents contended that the proviso extending the period to two years did not apply because the cancellation was mutual, and the amendment made by Mah.5 of 2010 was not applicable.

Para 6 - Court’s Consideration:
The court analyzed the arguments from both sides, focusing on the time limits provided under Section 48(1) before and after the amendment.

Para 7 - Analysis of Section 48(1):
The court examined Section 48(1) and its proviso, which initially provided a six-month limit but later extended it to two years in cases of dispute or financial issues after the amendment.

Para 8 - Petitioner’s Case under Section 48(1):
The court found that the petitioner's case falls within the six-month period from the cancellation deed and is also supported by the amended proviso extending the period to two years.

Para 9 - Applicability of Amendment (Mah.5 of 2010):
The court held that since the six-month limit had not expired before the amendment, the extended time limit applies, and the petitioner’s case is valid under both provisions.

Para 10 - Applicability of First Proviso:
The court also noted that even under the first proviso to Section 48(1), as it existed prior to the amendment, the petitioner’s case qualifies due to the refusal to deliver possession caused by the petitioner’s inability to pay.

Para 11 - Rejection of Authorities’ Grounds:
The court concluded that the authorities' ground for rejecting the refund application was erroneous as the application was filed within the applicable time limits.

Para 12 - Conclusion on Time Limits:
The court held that the application was filed within the time limit, whether under the original provision or the amended proviso.

Para 13 - Final Order:
The court quashed the impugned orders and directed the respondents to refund Rs.95,100/- to the petitioner within four weeks.

Para 14 - Rule Made Absolute:
The petition was disposed of with the rule made absolute.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. Maharashtra Stamp Act (Bombay Stamp Act, 1958)
   • Section 48(1): Governs the time limits for making an application for refund of stamp duty.
   • Proviso to Section 48(1): Amended by Mah.5 of 2010, extending the time limit to two years in specific cases such as disputes or financial difficulties.

Ratio Decidendi:

The court found that the petitioner was entitled to a refund of stamp duty because the application was filed within the time limits prescribed by Section 48(1) and its proviso. The rejection by the authorities was based on an erroneous interpretation of the applicable time limits.

Subjects:

Stamp Duty Refund, Cancellation of Agreement, Time Limits for Application

Agreement to Sale, Cancellation Deed, Maharashtra Stamp Act, Legal Dispute, Financial Difficulty