therwise than by the person and — THE INDIAN STAMP ACT, 1899 (2 of 1899)

1 therwise than by the person and or cancelled 0 ca believe that ee shel beg wa s 1 scribed b section 12 and such holder has no re g 1 therwise than by the person and at the time was affixed or cancelled 0 Act, such stamp shall so far as relates to such holder, be deemed to shel beg 1 therwise than by the person and was affixed or cancelled 0 reauited Dy this Act, such stamp shall so far as relates to such holder, be e been duly affixed and cancelled; at the time deemed to reauited Dy this Act, such have been duly affixed and cancelled; ovi Comments and Case-law xecu been duly affixed and cancelled; (b) nothing contained in this proviso shall relieve any person from any penalty him for omitting to affix orcancela stamp. (b) nothing contained in this proviso shall relieve incurred by him for omitting to affix orcancela stamp. s and Case-law Comments and Case-law here a promissory note in question was executed out side India and had pelly siamaad rageordanies with law applicable thereto tie place of here a promissory note in question was executed out s been sropelly siamaad rageordanies with law applicable thereto tie place of xecution, in suit by the promissory himself file in India for recovery 0 {he amount been sropelly siamaad rageordanies with law applicable thereto tie plac execution, in suit by the promissory himself file in India for recovery 0 {he amount e rejection of the objection regarding inadmissibility of the said instruments execution, in suit by the promissory himself file in India for recovery 0 {he a due, the rejection of the objection regarding inadmissibility of the said instruments ence was proper as the promissory himself had instituted the suit and there due, the rejection of the objection regarding inadmissibilit of t in evidence was proper as the promissory himself had instituted the suit and there ndorsement etc, and further there was no occasion of affixing the proper in evidence was proper as the promissory himself had instituted the suit and there was no endorsement etc, and further there was no occasion of affixing the proper tamp and their cancellation does not arise. Thus this section is not attractive. A. was no endorsement etc, and further there was no occasion of affixi stamp and their cancellation does not arise. Thus this section is not attractive. A. Kanju Swami vs. V.V.K. Swami, AIR 1988 Mad 336. stamp and their cancellation does not arise. Th Kanju Swami vs. V.V.K. Swami, AIR 1988 Mad 336. Sections 18, 32 and 33—in a Case where an unstamped document (other than as evidence, within three months of execution, the Sections 18, 32 and 33—in a Case where an unstamped do bill of exchange) is produced as evidence, within three months of execution, the n be collected without impounding and without penalty—if the document bill of exchange) is produced as evidence, with stamp duty can be collected without impounding and without penalty—if the document beyond three months, the bar of three months stamp duty can be collected without impounding and withou is sought to be used as evidence beyond three months, the bar of three months ocument can be impounded u/s 33 and stamp duty and is sought to be used as evidence beyond three m shall not apply, and the document can be impounded u/s 33 and stamp duty and iry of three months. (Malaysian Airlines System shall not apply, and the document can b penalty are levied, even after expiry of three months. (Malaysian Airlines System Bhd vs. M/s Stic Travels (P) Ltd.) 2001 (1) PLUR (SC) 195. penalty are levied, even after exp Bhd vs. M/s Stic Travels (P) Ltd.) 2001 (1) PLUR (SC) 195.

Section 1