Govt. Of Sindh Through Member (RS & EP) Board Of Revenue Sindh And Other vs M_S. Bayer Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd. And Other
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court of Sindh, which addressed whether certain 'mark-up agreements' executed by the respondent companies constituted 'conveyance deeds' subject to stamp duty under the Stamp Act, 1899. The petitioners, representing the Government of Sindh, contended that these transactions, involving simultaneous sale and re-purchase, were effectively conveyances rather than mere agreements, and that the High Court erred in its interpretation. The High Court had previously ruled that the documents in question were merely acknowledgments or confirmations of past transactions, not conveyance deeds, and thus not liable for stamp duty as such. Upon review, the Supreme Court of Pakistan determined that the case involves significant questions of statutory interpretation and matters of public importance. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to examine the legal nature of the mark-up agreements and the propriety of the High Court's interference in writ jurisdiction regarding departmental stamp duty recovery orders. The operation of the impugned High Court judgment was suspended pending the final hearing of the appeals.
- Whether a mark-up agreement constitutes a conveyance deed under the Stamp Act, 1899?
- Can an order regarding the recovery of stamp duty passed by a departmental authority be challenged in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Whether transactions of sale and re-purchase recorded in the same document amount to a conveyance?
- Stamp Act, 1899
- Shariah Act, 1991
- Article 199, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
JUDGMENT SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J. Petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment dated 14.12.2001, of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, passed In Const. Petitions Nos. D-318, D-374 and 351 of 1997.
2. Mr. Suleman Habibullah, learned Additional Advocate-General, appearing on behalf of the petitioners raised the following points:-
(a) Whether the transactions of sale and re-purchase are being simultaneously recorded In the same documents which amount to conveyance and could not be treated as agreements?
(b) Whether there is no deviation from the provisions contained In the Stamp Act, 1899 and Shariah Act, 1991; while passing the order of petitioner No. 1 ?
(c) Whether the mark-up agreements are In fact Conveyance Deeds under the Stamps Act, 1899 and whether hierarchy of the Government/Departmental Authority rightly passed orders In respect of recovery of Stamp Duty, and whether such order can be challenged by the companies In writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution?
Leamed Addl. A.-G. Also referred to the observations made by the High Court In para 25 of the impugned judgment, which reads as under:- In view of the above discussion it is apparent that the alleged Mark-up Agreement is not a conveyance deed as urged by the respondents, but is photo-copy of a document which at best can be regarded as an acknowledgement or confirmation of a past transaction and is not liable to Stamp Duty as a conveyance. Having reached this conclusion, it is not necessary to discuss the other contentions advanced by the learned counsel."
3. On the other hand, Mr. M. Naeem, learned ASC for the respondents opposed the points raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners and supported the impugned judgment.
4. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record carefully. As the interpretation of the Statutes is required and also the question of public importance is involved In these matters, therefore, leave to appeal is granted.
Operation of the impugned judgment of the High Court is suspended till the hearing of the appeals.