As per case facts, the Petitioner challenged orders assessing stamp duty on an NCLT, Mumbai order sanctioning a composite amalgamation scheme of two companies with the Petitioner. The authorities treated ... it as two distinct transactions, levying separate stamp duty, despite an earlier NCLT Chennai order for one of the merging entities. The Petitioner contended that stamp duty applies to the instrument (NCLT order), not underlying transactions, and relied on precedents. The question arose whether Section 5 of the Stamp Act, 1958 applies to an NCLT order sanctioning a composite scheme involving multiple companies, allowing it to be treated as comprising several distinct transactions for separate stamp duty assessment. Finally, the Court held that stamp duty is chargeable on the instrument (the NCLT order), not on underlying transactions. Applying Section 5 to segregate a composite scheme is impermissible. An NCLT order constitutes a single conveyance, regardless of multiple companies. Mumbai authorities lacked jurisdiction over the NCLT Chennai order. The impugned orders were quashed, and the Petitioner was liable for duty on the NCLT Mumbai order with a cap, and a refund of excess duty.