State Of Rajasthan vs Indus Towers Limited
2022 Latest Caselaw 7887 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

               D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20338/2018

1.     State    Of     Rajasthan,          Through         Collector    (Stamps)
       Bharatpur.
2.     Sub Registrar, Dholpur.
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
Indus Towers Limited, Through Power Of Attorney Holders Shri
Vikram Singh D-34, G- Business Park Complex, Subhash Marg,
C-Scheme, Jaipur.
                                                                 ----Respondent

Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20462/2018

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Collector (Stamps) Bharatpur.

2. Sub Registrar, Dholpur.

----Petitioners Versus Indus Tower Limited, Through Power Of Attorney Holders Shri Vikram Singh, D-34, G-Business Park Complex, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20806/2019 State Of Rajasthan, Through Sub Registrar, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Indus Towers Limited, Through Vikas Goel, Assistant Manager, D-34-G, Business Park Complex, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

2. Shri Vitthal Das Parwal Son Of Shri Ballabh Das Parwal, Resident Of House No. 376, Nahargarh Road, Jaipur.

3. Smt. Saroj Parwal Wife Of Shri Vitthal Das Parwal, Resident Of House No. 376, Nahargarh Road, Jaipur.

----Respondents D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7195/2020

(2 of 4) [CW-20338/2018]

1. Additional Collector (Stamps), Jaipur

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sub Registrar, Jaipur-Iv, Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus Samarth Life Styling Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Through Its Authorised Representative Sh. Kailash Chand Gupta, Registered Office At S.b. 114A, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur.

----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7204/2020

1. Additional Collector (Stamps), Jaipur

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sub Registrar, Jaipur-Iv, Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus Samarth Life Styling Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Through Its Authorised Representative Sh. Kailash Chand Gupta, Registered Office At S.b. 114A, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur.

----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7240/2020

1. Additional Collector (Stamps), Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sub Registrar, Jaipur-Iv, Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus Samarth Life Styling Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Through Its Authorised Representative Sh. Kailash Chand Gupta, Registered Office At

5.b. 114A, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur.

----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7244/2020

1. Additional Collector (Stamps), Jaipur.

2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sub Registrar, Jaipur-Iv, Jaipur.

----Petitioners Versus Samarth Life Styling Retailing Pvt. Ltd., Through Its Authorised Representative Sh. Kailash Chand Gupta, Registered Office At

(3 of 4) [CW-20338/2018]

S.B. 114A, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Major R.P. Singh, AAG with Mr. Jaivardhan Singh Shekhawat Mr. Aaditya Singh Ms. Devani Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yuvraj Samant with Ms. Neha Amola Mr. Pranav Pareek Mr. Praful Khandal Mr. Neeraj Kumar Meena

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA

Order

19/12/2022 Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the

issue raised in this writ petition is no longer res integra and

decided vide common order dated 07.11.2022 passed by Division

Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal Writ No. 193 of

2019 and connected appeals by the Principal Seat of the High

Court at Jodhpur.

In view of above, having considered the submissions

and the issue raised in the petitions as between the same parties,

these appeals are allowed. The order passed by Tax Board in each

of the petitions is set aside and it is declared that notification

dated 05.03.2003 is not applicable in respect of the leases

executed in favour of the respondents Indus Tower Limited and,

therefore, the respondent Indus Tower Limited would be liable to

pay stamp duty, as per the provisions of the law, which where in

force on the date of execution of lease deeds without claiming

benefit of notification dated 05.03.2003. Appropriate proceedings

(4 of 4) [CW-20338/2018]

shall be drawn for recovery of short payment of stamp duty by the

complainant authority under the Law.

No order as to costs.

Office is directed to place on record a copy of the judgment

on record.

(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J

Satyendra/Payal/34

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)