Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Of Haryana (Supreme Court of India)
Related Assessment Year :
Sponsored

The Supreme Court today ruled in the case of Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs State Of Haryana that sale transactions carried in the name of general power of attorney will have no legal sanctity and immovable property can be sold or transferred only through registered deeds. “Transactions of the nature of `GPA sales or `SA/ GPA/ WILL transfers’ do not convey title and do not amount to transfer nor can they be recognised or valid mode of transfer of immovable property.

“The courts will not tr

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

0 Comments

  1. S.R. RAMESH says:

    I wish buying a piece of land from a person in whose name Power of Attorey is registered by the principal land owner.
    The Encumbrance Certificate obtained from local Sub-Register Office also states that the GPA is registered in the agent’s name.

    Pl. clarify if I go for sale deed with the GPA party, will it be valid or else need I call the Principal owner for sale deed.
    Thanks.
    s.r. ramesh
    Hosur-635 109. Tamilnadu.

  2. vswami says:

    @RL Garg

    On the limited question of tax consequence/implicatio of the SC verdict, the following aspects call for a special noting:

    1. As observed: “As noticed in the earlier order, these kinds
    of transactions were evolved to avoid prohibitions/conditions regarding
    certain transfers, to avoid payment of stamp duty and registration charges on
    http://www.taxguru.indeeds of conveyance, to avoid payment of capital gains on transfers, to invest unaccounted money (‘black money’) and to avoid payment of
    ‘unearned increases’ due to Development Authorities on transfer.

    2. No doubt, the court has categorically ruled against the legal validity of the types of transactions, including transfers effected through an instrument of ‘GPA’,not by a proper sale deed registered and stamp duty paid. Nonetheless, the Court , has, in its wisdom, for obvious reasons, added a rider by way of a direction to the effect that the ruling shall not affect the validity of the transactions concluded before the specified date and acted upon for several purposes. If that is the correct understanding/import of the court’s judgment,then what should necessarily follow is that,the tax consequences would be the same as if those transactions were to be regarded as valid.

    Seeing, however, that the court’s judgment being first of its kind (except that, in the recent past, there has been at least one other similar instance,- that is where the SC has handed down a view against the builders’ right to sell a portion of ‘common areas’ as caqr parks to individual buyers of flats) has cetainly given rise to more than one imponderable and complex issue.Perhaps, these are matters which call for clarifications, from the judiciary and/ or the government in consultation with the juiciary, sooner than later.As otherwise, protracted disputes and court litigation would seem inevitable.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
March 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31