ப.மு. 15188/P1/2017, சீராய்வு மனு இறுதியாணை, 1.3.2022
The Tamil Nadu Registration Department, through the Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, issued Proceedings No. 15188/P1/2017 dated 1 March 2022, concerning the stamp duty classification of gift settlement deed P66/2016 at the Thiruvallur Sub Registrar Office. The proceedings amended the Kanchipuram District Registrar's order by correcting its reasoning on surcharge, but confirmed the deficit stamp duty of Rs.2,75,120 and penalty of Rs.80, and dismissed the review petition.
What the proceedings decide
Proceedings No. 15188/P1/2017 dated 1 March 2022 of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department concern a gift settlement executed between two cousins. The Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority decided that the recipient was not a family member within the family definition reproduced from Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act.
The Kanchipuram District Registrar's classification was therefore upheld. Although the District Registrar's reasoning incorrectly included surcharge, the final deficit stamp duty remained unchanged. The review petition was dismissed and the District Registrar's order was amended to reflect the correct basis.
Document and parties
Gift settlement deed P66/2016 was presented at the Thiruvallur Sub Registrar Office with the following details:
- Date of execution: 24 March 2016.
- Person giving the property: A. Sekar, son of Arumuga Mudaliar.
- Recipient: D. Duraivelu, son of Devarasinga Mudaliar.
- Stated property value: Rs.37,51,500.
- Stamp duty already paid: Rs.25,000.
- Deficit stamp duty fixed: Rs.2,75,120.
- Penalty fixed: Rs.80.
A. Sekar had obtained the property under sale deed 715/1995 and settled it on the son of his paternal uncle. The authority rejected the argument that the transaction should be treated as one between second level legal heirs because the property had been acquired exclusively by A. Sekar and was not inherited from ancestors.
Family relationship and stamp duty
Article 58(a)(i), as reproduced in Proceedings No. 15188/P1/2017, defines family as father, mother, husband, wife, son, daughter, grandchild, brother or sister. It also covers specified adoptive relationships where personal law permits adoption.
The cousin relationship between A. Sekar and D. Duraivelu does not fall within that definition. The deed was consequently classified as a settlement in favour of a person who was not a family member.
Key findings were:
- Stamp duty at 8 per cent applied on the execution date.
- Surcharge under local body laws did not apply to documents in this classification.
- Removing the surcharge from the reasoning did not change the calculated deficit of Rs.2,75,120.
- The penalty of Rs.80 remained payable.
- The Sub Registrar was directed to take appropriate action under section 47A if the stated property value was found to be understated.
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
Does a settlement deed between cousins qualify as a family settlement under this decision?
No. For deed P66/2016, the authority found that the cousin relationship was outside the family definition reproduced from Article 58(a)(i).
How much deficit stamp duty and penalty were confirmed?
The confirmed deficit stamp duty was Rs.2,75,120 and the penalty was Rs.80.
Was surcharge payable on this gift settlement deed?
No. The authority found that surcharge under local body laws did not apply to this classification, although correcting that point did not change the deficit stamp duty amount.
Could the Sub Registrar still examine whether the property was undervalued?
Yes. The Sub Registrar was instructed to take appropriate action under section 47A if the value stated in the deed was found to be lower than the proper value.
