Disposed

M/S Saipushpa Enterprises Thr. Its Partner v. Collector of Stamps Thane (City) and Anr.

Bombay HC11 Mar 2024IA/972/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging rejection of appeal against stamp duty adjudication; petitioner availed Maharashtra Amnesty Scheme, paid full stamp duty, penalty and registration charges, and sought to withdraw the petition and recover Rs.5,00,000 deposited with the Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition permitted to be withdrawn as disposed; interim application allowed permitting withdrawal of Rs.5,00,000 deposit with interest.

M/S Saipushpa Enterprises Thr. Its Partner Vs Collector of Stamps Thane (City) and Anr. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2024:BHC-AS:11704

¶2

41ia972-24+

¶3

sa_mandawgad

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.14105 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 972 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 14105 OF 2023

¶6

M/s. Puranik Tokyo Bay Private Ltd., A Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (M/s. Saipushpa Enterprises thr. its Partner) … Petitioner. Versus Collector Of Stamps Thane (City) and Anr. … Respondents.

¶7

Mr. Jaydeep Deo, for the Petitioner. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State.

¶8

CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : MARCH 11, 2024

¶9

P. C.:

¶10

The challenge is to the order dated 10^th December, 2021 passed by the Appellate Authority rejecting the Appeal challenging the adjudication of the stamp duty by the Collector of Stamps.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that

¶12

subsequently the Amnesty Scheme was introduced by the State of Maharashtra and to become eligible for the Amnesty Scheme one

¶13

of the condition was to withdraw the proceedings, if any, pending

¶14

1/3

¶15

41ia972-24+

¶16

in the Court of law. He would further submit that the Petitioners have given declaration of withdrawal of the proceedings and have also paid the entire stamp duty, penalty and registration charges. He points out to the challans which are annexed to the additional affidavit dated 16^th February, 2024. He seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition in view of the benefit availed under the Amnesty Scheme. He would further submit that pursuant to the order of this Court, during the pendency of the writ petition, the Petitioner had deposited an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. By way of an interim application, he seeks permission to withdraw the amount of Rs.5,00,000/-.

¶17

Interim Application has been preferred by the Petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the amount and for permission to pay the deficit stamp duty as per the Amnesty Scheme. Mr.Deo, would submit that prayer clause ‘b’ only survives for consideration and he be permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.5,00,000/along with interest accrued thereon.

¶18

The documents on record indicate that the benefit was taken of the Amnesty Scheme and the order dated 12^th February,

¶19

2/3

¶20

41ia972-24+

¶21

2024 passed under the Amnesty Scheme has been complied with by making payment of sum of Rs.26,58,881/-. As the amount as demanded by the Authority has been duly paid, the petition is permitted to be withdrawn. In lieu of the above payments, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs.5,00,000/which was deposited before this Court pursuant to the directions contained in the order dated 10^th November, 2023 alongwith the interest accrued thereon.

¶22

Civil Application stands allowed. Writ Petition is permitted to be withdrawn and is disposed of as withdrawn.

¶23

(Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.)

¶24

3/3

¶25

Signed by: Sanjay A. Mandawgad Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 11/03/2024 18:30:07

M/S Saipushpa Enterprises Thr. Its Partner v. Collector of Stamps Thane (City) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Saipushpa Enterprises Thr. Its Partner v. Collector of Stamps Thane (City) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Govind Namdeo Patil (Deceased Thr. LRs) Vs Shri. Kisan @ Krushna Ganpat Patil

Smt. Sakhubai Kamlakar Bhokare Thr Poa Moloy Sushilchandra Bakshi and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sandeep Vaman Kadam and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Deepak Bapusaheb Jagtap Vs Inchalkaranji Municipal Council (Thr. Chief Officer) and Ors.

Mrs. Vaishali Vijay Rasal vs M/S. Neumec Estate Developers LLP

Shivaji Tukaram Jadhav Vs 1. Balu Dada Barge Since Deceased Thr. His Lrs.