Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019, Stamp Duty Revision
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019 on 27 January 2022 as a final decision on Mahavishnu's review of the stamp duty classification for pending partition deed P7/2017 at the Chinnasalem Sub-Registrar Office. The decision partly changes the Kallakurichi District Registrar's classification by treating most of the partition under Article 45(a), while treating specified property transfers under Article 58(a)(i).
What the proceedings cover
Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019 of the Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority concern pending document P7/2017 at the Chinnasalem Sub-Registrar Office. The document is a partition deed dated 23 February 2017 involving the heirs of the late Venkatachalam and the late Srinivasan.
The properties came to the two brothers through a registered will executed by Ramasamy. After both brothers died, their heirs entered into the partition deed.
Key document details are:
- Part A was valued at Rs.7,02,17,000 and allotted to Geethanjali, Mahalakshmi and Vidyalakshmi.
- Part B was valued at Rs.6,14,11,000 and allotted to Radhika and Mahavishnu.
- The deed carried stamp duty of Rs.50,000.
- The Kallakurichi District Registrar assessed deficit stamp duty of Rs.27,96,615 and a penalty of Rs.185.
Classification decided on review
The Kallakurichi District Registrar had classified the deed under Article 45(b) as a partition among persons who were not family members, with part of the transaction treated as a transfer under Article 23.
Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019 reached a different conclusion for most of the deed. It relied on the principle that rights received through a will should be treated in the same way as rights received through succession, and that the heirs of a deceased brother may be treated as family members for a partition.
The resulting classifications are:
- Most of the deed is classifiable under Article 45(a), including the relevant properties except the identified transferred portions.
- For items 3 and 4 in Schedule A, the brothers were to receive equal shares under the will. Because the heirs of only one brother received the whole property, the other 50 percent is classifiable under Article 58(a)(i) as an arrangement in favour of a person outside the relevant family category.
- Plots 10 and 11 had belonged exclusively to Srinivasan under the will but were allotted to Venkatachalam's heirs. That allotment is also classifiable under Article 58(a)(i).
Who is affected
Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019 directly affect the parties to pending document P7/2017 and the stamp duty treatment of the properties listed in that deed. The supplied text changes the legal classification used by the District Registrar, but it does not state a recalculated final deficit duty or penalty.
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 the decision cancel the deficit stamp duty of Rs.27,96,615?
The supplied text changes the classification applied to the deed, but it does not state a recalculated deficit amount or expressly cancel the earlier demand.
Is the entire deed treated as a family partition?
No. Most of the deed is classifiable under Article 45(a), but specified portions of Schedule A are classifiable under Article 58(a)(i).
Why are plots 10 and 11 treated differently?
The will gave plots 10 and 11 exclusively to Srinivasan, but the partition deed allotted them to Venkatachalam's heirs. The proceedings therefore classify that allotment under Article 58(a)(i).
Does Proceedings No. 38317/P1/2019 apply to every partition deed in Tamil Nadu?
The supplied text is a final review decision concerning pending document P7/2017 at the Chinnasalem Sub-Registrar Office. It does not state that it is a statewide amendment.
