Examination and impounding of instruments
Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 deals with examination and impounding of instruments. Every person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, and every person in charge of a pubic office, except an officer of police, before whom any instrument, chargeable, in his opinion, with duty, is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, shall, if it appears The Act came into force on 01 Jul 1899.
(1) Every person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, and every person in charge of a pubic office, except an officer of police, before whom any instrument, chargeable, in his opinion, with duty, is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, shall, if it appears to him that such instrument is not duly stamped, impound the same.
(2) For that purpose every such person shall examine every instrument so chargeable and so produced or coming before him, in order to ascertain whether it is stamped with a stamp of the value and description required by the law in force in 1[India] when such instrument was executed or first executed:
Provided that--
(a) nothing herein contained shall be deemed to require any Magistrate or Judge of a Criminal Court to examine or impound, if he does not think fit so to do, any instrument coming before him in the course of any proceeding other than a proceeding under Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898);
(b) in the case of a Judge of a High Court, the duty of examining and impounding any instrument under this section may be delegated to such officer as the Court appoints in this behalf.
(3) For the purposes of this section, in cases of doubt,--
(a) 2[the 3[State Government]] may determine what offices shall be deemed to be public offices; and
(b) 4[the 2[State Government]] may determine who shall be deemed to be persons in charge of public offices.
STATE AMENDMENT
Orissa.--
Amendment of Section 33.--In section 33 of the principal Act after sub-section (1), the following sub-sections shall be inserted, namely:--
"(1-a) If it appears to such person from the copy of an instrument produced or coming in performance of his functions, within three years from the date of registration of the instrument, that such instrument is not duly stamped, he shall call for the original instrument and if he is satisfied on production of the instrument that it has not been duly stamped, impound the same and the deficient amount of duty shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty.
"(1-b) Where the original instrument is not produced such person shall refer the copy of the instrument to the Collector for determination of the market value of the property and the duty payable thereon and the Collector may determine the market value of the property and the duty as aforesaid in accordance with the procedure provided for in sub-section (2) of section 47-A.".
[Vide Orissa Act 7 of 1987, s. 5]
Uttar Pradesh
Amendment of section 33 of Act no. 11 of 1899.—In section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as amended in its application to Uttar Pradesh, hereinafter in this Chapter referred to as the principal Act, --
(i) in sub-section (2), in the proviso, in clause (a), for the words and figures Chapter XII or Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898”, the words and figures “sections 125 to 128 and sections 145 to 148 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973” shall be substituted.
(ii) after sub-section (2), for the existing sub-sections, the following sub-sections shall be substituted, namely:--
“(3) For the purpose of this section the State Government may in cases of doubt, determine what offices shall be deemed to be public offices and who shall be deemed to be persons in charge of public offices.
(4) Where deficiency in stamp duty paid is noticed from the any court or from the Commissioner of Stamps or an, Additional Commissioner of Stamp or a Deputy Commissioner of Stamps or an Assistant Commissioner of Stamps or any officer authorized by the Board of Revenue in that behalf, call for the original instrument so purpose, and the instrument so produced before the Collector shall be deemed to have been produced or come before him in the performance of his functions.
(5) In case the instrument is not produced within the period specified by the Collector, he may require payment of deficit stamp duty, if any, together with penalty under section 40 on the copy of the instrument:
Provided that no action under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) shall be taken after a period of four years from the date of execution of the instrument.”
[Vide Uttar Pradesh Act 6 of 1980, s. 6]
Section 33, The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act 2 of 1899).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-9.pdf 2011-07-20. CA 5820/2011. DATE-CHECK flagged 2006 lease dates from the facts; the document is the SMS Tea reportable judgment. Stamp Act 33/35: an unstamped instrument cannot be acted upon; an arbitration clause in that instrument goes with it until duty and penalty are paid. Later Interplay (2023) 7-judge overruled the unstamped-arbitration holding; this remains the teaching file for s.35 until that PDF is indexed. Map stamp-act 33 and 35.
On this section: s.33 duty to examine and impound an unstamped instrument. The court cannot act on an unstamped lease; it must impound and send it to the collector (SMS Tea).
-
Trustees of H. C. Dhanda Trust Trustee, Jogesh vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Collector Indore
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a discretion is vested by statute in a public authority to impose penalty not exceeding ten times the proper duty or deficient portion thereof under Section 40(1)(b) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, such discretion must be exercised reasonably and not in an oppressive manner. The imposition of extreme penalty of ten times is not automatic or mechanical but requires consideration of relevant factors including the conduct of the party, intent, fraud, deceit, and circumstances of the case. Mere intention to evade duty is insufficient to justify the maximum penalty; it is only in very extreme situations that the maximum penalty should be imposed. The purpose of penalty is deterrence and not retribution.
On this section: Power of Collector to impound instruments
-
Garware Wall Ropers LTD vs Coastal Marine Constructions Engineering LTD
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An arbitration clause contained in an unstamped agreement cannot be acted upon or enforced until the agreement is properly stamped and all stamp duty and penalty (if any) are paid. The mandatory provisions of the Indian Stamp Act requiring impounding of unstamped instruments apply to judicial authorities hearing Section 11 applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 11(6A), which limits judicial examination to the existence of an arbitration agreement, does not override these mandatory stamp duty requirements. The 'existence' of an arbitration agreement must be understood in context of all legal requirements for enforceability, including stamp duty compliance. The High Court must impound unstamped agreements and hand them to the stamp authority for adjudication of stamp duty issues before proceeding with the Section 11 application.
On this section: Sections 33 and 34 impose mandatory duty on judicial authorities to impound unstamped instruments and prevent their use until stamp duty is paid. The Court held these provisions apply to arbitration proceedings as they are mandatory fiscal measures protecting revenue. Section 35 and 40 provide for payment of deficient stamp duty and penalty.
-
M. D. U. P. State Indusl. Dev. CORP vs Mohit Kumar Lal
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a statutory scheme for adjudication of disputes by competent authorities exists under a statute like the Indian Stamp Act, courts should not prematurely adjudicate substantive issues of law and fact at the first instance without the requisite materials being presented. The proper course is to relegate parties to the competent authority for adjudication according to the statutory scheme, and only thereafter should parties have recourse to judicial review of the competent authority's decision if dissatisfied.
On this section: Cited as basis for stamp duty liability; the Court did not specify the exact provision but referenced it as governing the duty payable by developers and allottees
-
Avinash Kumar Chauhan vs Vijay Krishna Mishra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The phrase 'for any purpose whatsoever' in Section 35 of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 must be given its natural and full meaning, and applies with absolute force to bar admission of unstamped or insufficiently stamped instruments in evidence regardless of whether the purpose is primary (enforcement of contract) or collateral (proof of consideration payment or any other subsidiary fact). An instrument chargeable with stamp duty that has not been properly stamped cannot be admitted in evidence for any purpose unless the requirements of the provisos to Section 35 are satisfied by payment of proper duty and applicable penalties. The proviso to Section 49 of the Indian Registration Act 1908, which permits use of unregistered documents for collateral purposes, does not operate to override or diminish the absolute bar created by Section 35 of the Stamp Act. Where an agreement to sell is accompanied by transfer of possession before execution of formal conveyance, it becomes a conveyance by virtue of the legal fiction created in the Explanation to Article 23 of Schedule IA, and is therefore subject to stamp duty applicable to conveyances rather than agreements to sell.
On this section: Cast statutory duty on authorities receiving evidence to impound documents not duly stamped; court obligated to enforce this provision
-
M. D. U. P. State Indusl. Devt. CORP vs Suleman
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a statutory scheme exists under legislation such as the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for adjudication of disputes by competent authorities, courts should not adjudicate such issues at the first instance in writ proceedings without the required materials and factual basis. The character of an agreement (whether it constitutes a lease or other arrangement) for stamp duty purposes must be determined by the competent authority under the statutory scheme, relegating the parties thereto, rather than by courts making a prima facie determination in writ petitions.
On this section: These sections govern stamp duty on leases and other documents respectively. The central issue was whether tripartite agreements fell under Section 33 (lease provisions requiring full stamp duty) or Section 47(A), and whether exemptions applied.
-
Hariom Agrawal vs Prakash Chand Malviya
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A photocopy of an original document which is improperly stamped or insufficiently stamped cannot be admitted in evidence, either as primary evidence or as secondary evidence under Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The provisions of Sections 33, 35, 36, and 37 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 apply only to original instruments as defined in Section 2(14) and do not extend to copies thereof. The Collector's power under Section 48-B to recover stamp duty deficiency noticed from a copy of an instrument does not authorize the impounding of the copy for purposes of judicial admission of evidence. Therefore, when the original instrument is lost and only a photocopy is available, and the original was improperly or insufficiently stamped, the photocopy cannot be admitted as secondary evidence in any proceeding.
On this section: Power to impound instruments not duly stamped - the Court clarified that this power applies only to original instruments, not copies
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… three modes. - a) The first mode is where the appointment of the arbitrator takes place by the parties consensually in accordance with the terms of the arbitration agreement, or by a designated arbitral institution, without the intervention of the court. In such a case, the arbitrator / tribunal is obligated by Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (or the applicable State Act) to impound the instrument, and direct the parties to pay the requisite Stamp Duty (and penalty, if any), and obtain an endorsement from the concerned Collector. This would be evident from the provisions of Section 34 of the Stamp Act which provides that …
Made under this section, and citing it
2 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
Questions about Section 33
What have the courts held on Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act?
SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. (20 Jul 2011) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.33 duty to examine and impound an unstamped instrument. The court cannot act on an unstamped lease; it must impound and send it to the collector (SMS Tea). Another 6 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2007 to 2020.
How do I find court cases under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Stamp Act 33, section 33 Stamp Act, section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act. People searching for it also type indian stamp act 33a and indian stamp act article 33. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 7 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with SMS Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. v. Chandmari Tea Co. Pvt. Ltd. (20 Jul 2011).
What should I read with Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 40 (Collector's power to stamp instruments impounded), section 47 (Power of payer to stamp bills, and promissory notes received by him unstamped), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. 2 instruments name it without being made under it, most recently The Andaman and Nicobar Islands Stamp Rules and its Amendments (1979), then The Indian Stamp Rules 1925 (as in force of Tamil Nadu) (1964).
When did Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act come into force?
Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, cited as Stamp Act 33, came into force on 01 Jul 1899, having been enacted on 27 Jan 1899. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 47. Power of payer to stamp bills, and promissory notes received by him unstamped4923 words
- 2. Definitions3110 words
- 3. Instruments chargeable with duty1916 words
- 10. Duties how to be paid1187 words
- 28. Direction as to duty in case of certain conveyances961 words
- 73. Books, etc., to be open to inspection932 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.