Under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, if a person authorised to receive evidence comes across an instrument that is not duly stamped, what action are they required to take?

Explanation The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 is a fiscal enactment aimed at consolidating and amending the law relating to stamp duty payable on instruments, and it operates on the transaction document itself rather than the underlying transaction. Section 33 empowers not just public officers, but also arbitrators and local commissioners authorised to receive evidence, to examine any instrument produced before them to check whether it bears a stamp of the value and description required by law. If such a person finds the instrument is not duly stamped, they are mandated to impound it, meaning they must seize and retain it rather than simply rejecting or ignoring the defect. There are limited exceptions to this rule, such as when a Magistrate or Judge of a criminal court chooses not to examine or impound the document, or when the duty of impounding is delegated to another appointed officer. Section 35 further reinforces this scheme by stating that an instrument not duly stamped generally cannot be admitted as evidence or acted upon, although it can later be admitted on payment of the deficient duty plus a prescribed penalty.