Bombay HC Rules Agreement to Lease of CIDCO Plot Attracts only Agreement Stamp Duty of Article 5 & Not Article 36
The petitioner was allotted plot by the Cidco in Navi Mumbai and paid full premium of Rs.3,73,51,450/-.
On 13.10.1995, the CIDCO executed the Agreement to Lease
on a stamp paper of Rs.20/- under Article 5(h) of Schedule 1 to the Stamp Act, for four years and to execute the lease deed on completion of the works.
By the notice dated 21.2.1998, the respondent no.1 demanded Rs.26,14,695/- as payable under Article 36(a)(4) and (C) of Schedule 1 of the Stamp Act.
Agreement to lease, it is settled, is not a lease creating a demise or a right or interest favour of the Petitioner. Even the entire agreement refers to the Petitioner as licensee only. The said Agreement to lease does not create a present demise and is therefore not chargeable with stamp duty along with penalty and interest under Article 36 of Schedule I of the Stamp Act. The Petitioner was a mere licensee with no right or interest or demise in the said land. It cannot, therefore, be said that since vide the said Agreement the intention of the parties was to enter into a lease or the term license used in the said agreement is used so as to avoid immediate payment of stamp duty. The said agreement does not create a present demise in favour of the Petitioner and the status of the Petitioner as licensee would only change only after the actual execution of the lease deed which would be executed only after the works as contemplated in the agreement are fulfilled and therefore the said agreement cannot be termed as a lease.
By the Order dated 10.3.1998, the respondent no.2 passed an order for the deficit stamp duty and interest at 2@ per month.
Judgment dated 18.12.2025 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.5635 of 2005 of Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochemicals Vs. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and others

