Supreme Court Refers Fraudulent Intent Requirement Under Stamp Act Section 47-A

Scope of Section 47-A reconsidered

The Supreme Court has referred an important stamp-duty question to a larger Bench: must the registering or revenue authority possess material showing wilful undervaluation and fraudulent intent before initiating proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899?

Section 47-A permits scrutiny where the registering officer has reason to believe that the market value or consideration stated in an instrument is not the true value. The document may then be referred to the Collector for determination of the correct value and duty.

Earlier precedents doubted

The Bench questioned the approach in V.N. Devadoss and the later decision in Registrar of Assurances v. ASL Vyapar, which associated the provision with wilful undervaluation intended to evade duty. Until the larger Bench answers the reference, the Court has not finally removed or affirmed the fraudulent-intent requirement. The distinction is important between the threshold for initiating valuation proceedings and the ultimate finding on undervaluation.