Big setback! Homebuyers may have to pay much more in Maharashtra
Maharashtra homebuyers: The state government had increased the ready reckoner rate in 2017. However, the decision was opposed by the developers and other stakeholders in the real estate sector.
If one has bought a flat between May 19 to September 19 in 2017, he/she might have to pay additional stamp duty and registration charges in accordance with the revised ready reckoner (RR) rate. The state government had increased the ready reckoner rate in 2017. However, the decision was opposed by the developers and other stakeholders in the real estate sector. “Due to this pressure, a stay order was passed by the government over the rise of RR rate between May 19 to September 19 in 2017. Subsequently, it was withdrawn. People have paid the stamp duty and registration charges as per the old RR rates for the period of these four months,” said sources in the state revenue department.The finance department has raised the issue of the government being deprived of their revenue in these four months, added the source.
“The law is equal to every one. In 2017, all buyers need to pay the same stamp duty and registration charges. Therefore, we decided to recover the additional charges from the buyers with a retrospective effect.,” said sources The final decision of issuing notices will be taken in the cabinet subcommittee meeting on May 15, 2018. “The state revenue minister, Chandrakant Patil, is heading the cabinet subcommittee. However, the house minister, Prakash Mehta, had opposed the decision, noting that it will be absurd to recover the charges after one year of registration. But the finance and revenue department are adamant and they do not want to lose the government revenue in a crisis time,” said senior government officials.
Shirish Deshpande, chairman at the Grahak Panchayat said, “As per the taxation law, this retrospective tax recovery decision can be struck down. The state government should immediately rescind it’s decision or we will challenge it in the court.”
(By Sudhir Suryawanshi, DNA)