Official guidance, Tamil Nadu land law
D.Dis.No.50049/P1/2014, Appeal on Document No.8401/2008
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, issued D.Dis.No.50049/P1/2014 dated 15 September 2022 concerning an appeal by The Gandhi Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited against recovery of deficit stamp duty on a sale deed. The proceedings examine whether remission under G.O.Ms.No.2179, Co-operation Department, dated 29 June 1966 applies when the property owner is not a society member but the owner's representative is a member, and reject the argument that the recovery proceedings were time barred. The supplied text ends before the final operative decision on the appeal.
What the proceedings concern
D.Dis.No.50049/P1/2014 dated 15 September 2022 was issued by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration, Chennai. It concerns Document No.8401/2008, a sale deed executed on 24 September 2008 and registered at the Sub Registrar Office, Guduvanchery.
The Gandhi Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited appealed against a recovery certificate issued by the District Registrar, Chennai (South). The certificate required payment of deficit stamp duty of Rs.56,38,062.
Transaction and stamp duty issue
The sale deed recorded the following:
- M/s. Adarsh Private Limited was the property owner and first executant.
- Mr. R. Ramesh was the agreement holder in possession and second executant.
- The Gandhi Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited was the purchaser.
- The stated consideration was Rs.7,04,75,724.
- No stamp duty was borne by the deed.
The deed was treated as exempt under G.O.Ms.No.2179, Co-operation Department, dated 29 June 1966. That government order provides stamp duty remission for an instrument relating to the business of a co-operative society when executed by a co-operative society or by its member.
An audit later pointed out that the property owner was not a member of the purchasing society. Only the owner's representative and the second executant's power agent were members. The District Registrar, Chennai (South), therefore found the deed ineligible for the concession and issued the recovery certificate.
Findings recorded in the appeal
The Gandhi Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited argued that:
- The managing director of the owner company was a society member, so the deed qualified for exemption.
- The recovery proceedings were time barred because the District Registrar acted six years after registration.
- Collection would be difficult because the society had sold the property as plots to its members.
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration held that the time-bar argument was not sustainable, relying on court decisions concerning time limits for public officers performing statutory duties.
The proceedings also examine agency and power of attorney law. They explain that an agent acts for the principal and that authorised acts are legally treated as acts of the principal. The supplied text ends during this reasoning and does not include the final operative decision allowing or dismissing the appeal.
Who may be affected
These proceedings are relevant to co-operative societies, property owners, authorised representatives and registration professionals where stamp duty remission is claimed based on the membership of an agent, managing director or power agent rather than the membership of the actual owner or principal.
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 sale deed automatically receive stamp duty remission because the purchaser is a co-operative housing society?
The proceedings state that G.O.Ms.No.2179, Co-operation Department, dated 29 June 1966 covers an instrument relating to society business when executed by a co-operative society or by its member. The District Registrar found the deed ineligible because the vendor and property owner was not a member.
Is membership of the vendor company's managing director enough for the exemption?
The society argued that it was enough, but the proceedings distinguish the representative from the principal and explain that an agent acts for the principal. The supplied text ends before the final operative ruling on this issue.
How much deficit stamp duty was demanded for Document No.8401/2008?
The District Registrar, Chennai (South), determined and sought to recover deficit stamp duty of Rs.56,38,062.
Was the recovery proceeding held to be time barred?
No. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration held that the society's time-bar contention was not sustainable.
