Factual and procedural background
Emami Agrotech Limited received a deed from Rasoi Limited in September 2014 assigning copyrights in several product labels and brands for a stated consideration of Rs 9 crore. The deed was registered with the authorities who accepted the valuation and granted full exemption from stamp duty under Article 23 of the Indian Stamp Act charging only a nominal Rs 300. Years later the stamp authorities issued notices and passed orders demanding Rs 53 99 700 as deficit stamp duty claiming the exemption did not apply because the assignment was not made “by entry” under the Copyright Act and certain registration certificates were allegedly missing. Emami’s appeal was rejected leading the company to file a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court.
Dispute in question
The core dispute was whether the copyright assignment deed qualified for complete exemption from stamp duty or whether the authorities could reopen the already registered document years later and demand full duty by questioning the mode of assignment and production of additional certificates.
Reasoning and decision of court
The High Court found that the deed was validly executed in writing and registered exactly as required under Sections 18 and 19 of the Copyright Act 1957. It held that the registering authorities had already accepted the market value and granted the exemption at the time of registration so they could not later invoke the undervaluation provisions of Section 47A without any fresh ground or proper procedure. The court ruled that the exemption under Article 23 applies to such copyright assignments and the authorities failed to give any valid reason for denying it. Both the original demand order and the appellate order were set aside and the writ petition was allowed.
Legal point settled in this case
A properly executed and registered deed of assignment of copyright qualifies for full exemption from stamp duty under Article 23 of Schedule IA of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 and registering authorities cannot arbitrarily reopen the matter years later to demand deficit duty once they have accepted the document and granted the exemption at registration.
Emami Agrotech Limited Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Range-III, Hooghly & Ors., Order date: 20.04.2026, Case Number: W.P.A. No. 19812 of 2022, Neutral Citation: Not Provided, Name of court and Judge: High Court at Calcutta, Hon’ble Justice Krishna Rao.
Disclaimer: Donot treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain subjective errors.
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi
#IPUpdate #IPCaselaw #IPCaseLaw #IPLaw #IPRNews #IPIndiaupdate #Trademark #Copyright #DesignLaw #PatentLaw #Law #Legal #IndianIPUpdate #AdvocateAjayAmitabhSuman #IPAdjutor
