2012 (State v. Vinod Kumar) registered under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 hol
Case Details
Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 347 of 2013 Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Saran Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Standing Counsel representing the respondent nos. 1 to 3. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.04.2012 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Stamp / Collector Stamp), District Meerut in Case No.181/11/V-215 of 2011-2012 (State Vs. Vinod Kumar) registered under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 holding that there was a deficiency of stamp duty to the tune of Rs.1,47,960/- on the sale deed dated 25.2.2011 executed in favour of the petitioner and directing for a recovery of the aforesaid amount along with a penalty of Rs.75,000/- with interest @ 1.5 per cent per month as well as against the judgement and order dated 21.12.2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Meerut Division, Meerut dismissing Stamp Appeal No. 45 of 2011-12 filed by the petitioner against the order dated 11.04.2012.
Legal Reasoning
The facts of the case are that a sale deed dated 25.2.2011 was executed in favour of petitioner. The property transferred through the aforesaid sale deed was a building and it was recorded in the sale deed that the roof of the building and all rights on the roof of the building were also being transferred in favour of the petitioner. A stamp duty of Rs.1,48,000/- was paid on the aforesaid sale deed disclosing the market value of the property as Rs.21,14,000/-. Subsequently, the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), District Meerut inspected the property on 07.07.2011 and reported that the building considered of two floors and the existence of first floor was not disclosed in the sale deed and stamp duty was paid only showing constructions on the ground floor. The Additional District Magistrate reported that there was a deficiency of Rs.1,47,960/- on the sale deed and, therefore, a case under Section 47-A, i.e., Case No.181/11/V-215 of 2011-2012 was registered before the Collector (Stamp), District Meerut. It appears from a reading of the order dated 11.04.2012 passed by the Collector (Stamp) that subsequently, on the prayer of the petitioner, the disputed property was again inspected by the Assistant Commissioner (Stamp) on 30.03.2012 and in his inspection report, the Assistant Commissioner (Stamp) noted that the first floor of the building was newly constructed almost one year back and before the execution of the sale deed. The petitioner filed receipts showing purchase of construction materials to prove his case that the first floor of the building was constructed after the execution of the sale deed. However, the Collector (Stamp) vide his order dated 11.04.2012 rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted the balance-sheet and other financial documents of the persons from whom the constructions material had been purchased by the petitioner to support his case based on the receipts of the construction material. The said order of the Collector (Stamp) was affirmed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration) vide his order dated 21.12.2012. Hence the present petition. I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties. A reading of the order dated 11.04.2012 passed by the Collector (Stamp), District Meerut shows that in his aforesaid order, the Collector (Stamp) has taken note of the inspection report dated 30.03.2012. However, there is no assessment by the Collector of the contents of the inspection report dated 30.03.2012. The inspection report dated 30.03.2012 notes that the constructions were almost one year old, i.e., the first floor was constructed sometimes in March, 2011 or in February, 2011. The Collector (Stamp) while passing the order dated 11.04.2012 has relied on the report dated 07.07.2011 submitted by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), District Meerut which only notes that there were two floors on the building and both the floors were being used for commercial purpose. The sale deed dated 25.02.2011 notes that the building is commercial in nature and stamp duty had been paid accordingly. Apparently, the inspection report dated 30.03.2012 which is a product of the inspection done by the Collector (Stamp) himself does not indicate conclusively that first floor was constructed before the sale deed dated 25.02.2011. There is no evidence on record to show that the receipts submitted by the petitioner showing purchase of construction materials were forged or not reliable. The petitioner as purchaser of the construction materials could not be expected to produce the balance-sheet and other business documents of the traders from whom he purchased the construction materials. The contents of the report dated 30.03.2012, if taken literally, show that the first floor was constructed in March, 2012. There is no evidence on record to show that the first floor of the building at the time of the execution was constructed by the time of the execution of the sale deed, i.e., on 25.02.2012. Apparently, the order dated 11.04.2012 and the findings recorded in the same are without any evidence. A reading of the order dated 21.12.2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Meerut Division, District Meerut in Stamp Appeal No. 45 of 2011-12 shows that the Additional Commissioner has mechanically passed the order rejecting the appeal without considering the merits of the order dated 11.04.2012. The orders dated 11.04.2012 and 21.12.2012 indicate a complete non-application of mind by Collector (Stamp) and the appellate court. For the aforesaid reason, the orders dated 11.04.2012 passed by the Collector (Stamp) and 21.12.2012 of the Additional Commissioner (Administration), Meerut Division, Meerut are contrary to law and liable to the quashed and are, hereby, quashed.
Decision
The petition is allowed. The amount deposited by the petitioner in pursuance to the order dated 07.02.2013 passed by this Court shall be returned to the petitioner on a simple interest of six per cent per annum within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before the Collector (Stamp), District Meerut. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is allowed. Order Date :- 2.2.2023 Vipasha Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad