THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO Writ Petition No.13862 of 2003 ORDER: Petitioner is a firm with name M/s.Ekta Head Exchangers. They are put to auction by Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation (APSFC). Partner of firm, Sri Narsing Rao and his father participated in auction. They became successful bidders at Rs.1,20,00,000/- (One crore twenty lakh only). The sale was confirmed by latter. Petitioner paid entire amount, so as to get property registered in two different names –petitioner herein and M/s.Naveen Industries. Two sale deeds were presented to first respondent for registration. Sale deed for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakh only) in favour of M/s.Naveen Industries attracted stamp duty and registration fee of Rs.1,87,600/- (Rupees one lakh eighty seven thousand six hundred only), whereas, sale deed in favour of petitioner herein for a sum of Rs.90,00,000/- (Rupees ninety lakh only) attracted a stamp duty and registration fee of Rs.5,85,000/- (Rupees five lakh eighty five thousand only) APSFC executed sale deeds and 50% stamp duty and registration fee were exempted in terms of Government Order being G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 22.02.2003. However, documents were kept pending for seeking clarification with regard to 50% exemption of stamp duty. By impugned letter dated 12.06.2003, first respondent demanded full stamp duty and registration fee on the ground that Government Order, being G.O.Ms.No.624 dated 24.05.2003 is not in force and that bill came in to effect from date of publication of same in A.P.Gazette. Petitioner was also informed that if the amount is not paid, documents will be impounded and will be sent to second respondent for further necessary action. Petitioner was asked to pay a sum of Rs.5,40,000/- (Rupees five lakh forty thousand only) towards stamp duty and transfer duty. Aggrieved thereby, present writ petition is filed seeking invalidation of communication of first respondent. First respondent filed counter affidavit stating that G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 22.02.2003 is not applicable, as petitioner purchased land, building and machinery in auction conducted by APSFC. He also stated that said G.O. is not enforceable until and unless it is notified in Indian Stamp Act, 1899. (‘Stamp Act’, for brevity) Learned counsel for petitioner has taken this Court through various Government Orders and submits that Government provide 50% exemption on stamp duty on instruments of lease cum sale in favour of industrial units and first respondent cannot refuse to grant 50% exemption on stamp duty and transfer duty. Refuting same, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana Area) submits that petitioner is not entitled for any such exemption. Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.9 dated 05.01.2001, providing facilities / incentives for setting up of new industries in Andhra Pradesh. Para 5(6.1) thereof, provided for 50% exemption on stamp duty, registration fee and transfer duty. By yet another order, being G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 07.02.2001, Government, in exercise of their powers under Section 9(1)(a) of the Stamp, Act reduced stamp duty by 50% on instruments of lease, lease cum sale and sales executed in favour of industrial units and also directed to remit stamp duty in full on loan agreements, credit deeds, mortgages and hypothecation, which is executed by industrial units in favour of banks or financial institutions. Then came G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 22.02.2003. A reading of this G.O. shows that Commissioner of Industries sought clarification of Government in respect of Para 5(6.1) of G.O.Ms.No.9 dated 05.01.2001, as to whether new entrepreneurs acquiring land along with buildings from a sick or existing unit can also be extended the facility of 50% exemption from payment of stamp duty. Government considered matter and issued G.O.Ms.No.41 inter alia providing as follows. The Government, after careful examination of the matter, have decided to extend the facility in Para 5(6.1) of the aforesaid Government Order to the new entrepreneurs acquiring land along with building from a sick or existing unit….Accordingly, Para 5(6.1) of the orders in the reference first read above, shall be read as follows:…..“50% exemption will be allowed on Stamp Duty, Registration Fee and Transfer duty of lands meant for industrial use. Exemption of stamp duty and registration fee for loan agreements, credit deeds, mortgages and hypothecation deeds executed by the industries in favour of banks or financial institutions. 50% exemption will also be allowed on stamp duty, registration fee and transfer duty on the total value in the case of new entrepreneurs acquiring land along with buildings from a sick or existing unit. (In such case investment subsidy will not be allowed twice on the same lend and buildings)”…Suitable modifications to G.O.Ms.No.103, Revenue (Registration.II) Department, dated 07.02.2001, which was issued, based on the G.O.Ms.No.9, Industries & Commerce (IP) Department, dated 05.01.2001, will be issued separately, by the Revenue Department. In furtherance of G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 22.02.2003, Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.624 dated 24.05.2003 under Section 9(1)(a) of the Stamp Act providing for 50% exemption on total value in case of new entrepreneurs acquiring land along with buildings. These aspects are not disputed. In this case, documents were submitted on 19.04.2003 and they were kept pending. Therefore until and unless document is duly registered and certificate is endorsed thereupon under Section 61 of the Registration Act, 1908, registration cannot be said to be completed. Therefore, the notification, vide G.O.Ms.No.624 dated 24.05.2003 giving effect to the policy of Government as communicated in G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 22.02.2003 is also applicable to documents submitted by petitioner. Therefore, first respondent is not entitled to impound documents nor compel petitioner to pay stamp duty and registration fees without giving facility of availing 50% exemption as per Government Orders referred to hereinabove. In the result, for the above reasons, the writ petition must succeed. It is accordingly allowed. It is brought to notice of this Court that by reason of interim orders passed on 29.07.2003, registered documents has already been released to petitioner. If that be so, respondents 1 and 2 may not initiate any action in collection of stamp duty, which is exempted. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) August 13, 2009 Bvv IN THIE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P.No.13862 OF 2003 Between: M/s. Samrat Industries, Rep. by its Managing Partnet, Sri E.Narsing Rao, S/o E.Vittal, Office at Plot No.1-B/14, Ist Floor, S.V.C.I.E., Balnagar, Hyderabad-37. …Petitioner AND 1. The Sub Registrar, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District 4-20-21, Sumitra nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. 2. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District, Khairtabad, Hyderabad. 3. The Government of A.P., rep by it Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce, Govt. of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad. …Respondents