Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022, Rectification Deed Revision Order, 2023
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022 dated 1 March 2023, allowing the revision petition concerning rectification deed P170/2020 at the Poonamallee Sub Registrar Office. The authority treated the document as a simple rectification deed that did not attract stamp duty, and set aside the South Chennai District Registrar's demand for deficient stamp duty of ₹3,18,590 and a penalty of ₹1,410.
What the proceedings decide
Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022 dated 1 March 2023 were issued by the Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. They decide a revision petition under section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act concerning pending document P170/2020 at the Poonamallee Sub Registrar Office.
The document was a deed of rectification executed on 9 December 2020 in favour of S. Durga Bhavani. The South Chennai District Registrar had classified it as a fresh sale under Article 23 of the Indian Stamp Act and demanded deficient stamp duty of ₹3,18,590 and a penalty of ₹1,410.
Nature of the correction
Rectification deed P170/2020 corrected information omitted from sale deed 72/2007. The earlier sale deed had been written as though Eeswaramoorthy, the power agent, owned the property. It had failed to state that he executed the sale as the authorised agent of the owners, S. Sankaravel and S. Sudha.
The rectification deed added the names of the principals who granted the authority and the details of the power of attorney document. The authority found that:
- There was no change to the property's extent, four boundaries or village name.
- The location and identity of the property already conveyed remained unchanged.
- Comparison with the property description in earlier document 1892/2004 showed no change to the property.
- The omission of the principals' names and power of attorney details resulted from oversight.
- There was no intention to evade government revenue.
Final decision
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority applied the reasoning in the Registration Department circular dated 3 September 2014 and an earlier Chief Controlling Revenue Authority decision dated 7 February 2018.
The authority concluded that rectification deed P170/2020 could not be classified as an instrument under section 2(14) of the Indian Stamp Act. It was treated as a simple rectification deed that did not attract stamp duty. The South Chennai District Registrar's order dated 15 September 2021 was set aside, and S. Durga Bhavani's revision petition dated 15 June 2022 was accepted.
Who is affected
Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022 directly concern the parties to rectification deed P170/2020. The reasoning is relevant where a rectification only corrects power of attorney or principal details and does not alter the property already conveyed.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Was rectification deed P170/2020 treated as a new sale?
No. The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority held that it was a simple rectification deed that did not attract stamp duty.
Why was the deficient stamp duty demand cancelled?
The correction only added omitted details about the principals and the power of attorney. The property's extent, boundaries, village and identity remained unchanged, and the authority found no intention to evade government revenue.
How much had the District Registrar demanded?
The South Chennai District Registrar demanded deficient stamp duty of ₹3,18,590 and a penalty of ₹1,410. Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022 dated 1 March 2023 set aside that decision.
Does this decision say that every rectification deed is free from stamp duty?
No. Proceedings No. 19618/P1/2022 decide document P170/2020 based on the finding that the correction did not change the property already conveyed.