INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, TAMIL NADU Vs. K.BASKARAN
LAWS(SC)-2020-6-13
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on June 15,2020

Inspector General Of Registration, Tamil Nadu Appellant
VERSUS
K.BASKARAN Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

BOARD OF EDUCATION V. RICE [REFERRED TO]
PRADYAT KUMAR BOSE VS. THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT [REFERRED TO]
H. LAVENDER AND SON LTD. V. MINISTER OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT [REFERRED TO]
CUSTOMS AND EXCISE COMRS. V. CURE AND DEELEY LTD [REFERRED TO]
MUNGONI V. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTHERN RHODESIA [REFERRED TO]
DATTATRAYA MORESHWAR VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
HARISHANKAR BAGLA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SHIVABALAK GAURISHANKAR DUBE [REFERRED TO]
RAZA BULAND SUGAR CO LIMITED RAMPUR VS. MUNICINAL BOARD RAMPUR [REFERRED TO]
KHAMBHALIA MUNICIPALITY VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. P K ROY [REFERRED TO]
MANGULAL CHUNILAL VS. MANILAL MAGANLAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MYSORE VS. V K KANGAN:NARASIMHA RAM NAIK [REFERRED TO]
RAM KANAI JAMINI RANJAN PAL VS. MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE W BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
T V USMAN VS. FOOD INSPECTOR TELLICHERRY MUNICIPALITY TELLICHERRY [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. BRUNDABAN SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
SAHNI SILK MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF PATIALA VS. S K SHARMA [REFERRED TO]
VENKATASWAMAPPA VS. SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER REVENUE [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYABAI VS. SHRIRAM TUKARAM [REFERRED TO]
BALAJI RICE MILL VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
SIDHARTHA SARAWGI VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA [REFERRED TO]
MACKINON MACKENZIE & COMPANY LTD VS. MACKINNON EMPLOYEES UNION [REFERRED TO]
MOHESH KUMAR GOLANI AND ANR. VS. THE CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SAURABH SHARMA VS. SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE (EAST) [LAWS(DLH)-2021-4-35] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

UDAY UMESH LALIT,J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These eight appeals raise common questions touching upon the interpretation of Section 47A [As inserted by the Tamil Nadu Act 24 of 1967. Later, by the Tamil Nadu Act 1 of 2000, Sub- Sections (4) to (10) in Section 47-A were substituted for Sub-Sections (4) and (5)] of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 ('the Act', for short) and the Tamil Nadu Stamp (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1968 ('the Rules', for short) as amended from time to time. Said Section 47-A of the Act now stands:-
"Section 47-A. Instrument of conveyance etc., undervalued how to be dealt with.- (1) If the Registering Officer appointed under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (Central Act XVI of 1908), while registering any Instrument of conveyance, [exchange, gift, release of benami right or settlement] has reason to believe that the market value of the property of which is the subject matter of conveyance, exchange, gift, release of benami right or settlement, has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may, after registering such instrument, refer the same to the Collector, for determination of the market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon.

(2) On receipt of reference under sub-section (1), the Collector shall, after giving the parties reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding an enquiry in such manner as may be prescribed by Rules made under this Act, determine the market value of the property which is the subject matter of conveyance, exchange, gift, release of benami right or settlement, and the duty as aforesaid. The difference, if any, in the amount of duty, shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty.

(3) The Collector may, suo motu, or otherwise, within five years from the date of registration of any instrument of conveyance, exchange, gift, release of benami right or settlement, not already referred to him under sub-section (1), call for and examine the instrument for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the correctness of the market value of the property which is the subject matter of conveyance, exchange, gift, release of benami right or settlement, and the duty payable thereon and if after such examination, he has reason to believe that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may determine the market value of such property and the duty as aforesaid in accordance with the procedure provided for in sub-section (2). The difference, if any, in the amount of duty, shall be payable by the persons liable to pay the duty;

Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any instrument registered before the date of commencement of the Indian Stamp (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1967.

(4) Every person liable to pay the difference in the amount of duty under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) shall, payable such duty within such period as may be prescribed. In default of such payment, such amount of duty outstanding on the date of default shall be a charge on the property affected in such instrument. On any amount remaining unpaid after the date specified for its payment, the person liable to pay the duty shall pay, in addition to the amount due, interest at one per cent per month on such amount for the entire period of default. ... ... ...

(5) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Collector under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), may appeal to such Authority as may be prescribed in this behalf. All such appeals shall be preferred within such time, and shall be heard and disposed of in such manner, as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act. ... ... ...

(6) The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority may, suo motu, call for and examine an order passed under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) and if such order is prejudicial to the interests of revenue, he may make such inquiry or cause such inquiry to be made and, subject to the provisions of this Act, may initiate proceedings to revise, modify or set aside such order and may pass such order thereon as he thinks fit.

(7) The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority shall not initiate proceedings against any order passed under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) if, -

(a) the time for appeal against that order has not expired; or

(b) more than five years have expired after the passing of such order.

(8) No order under sub-section (6) adversely affecting a person shall be passed unless that person has had a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

(9) In computing the period referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (7), the time during which the proceedings before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority remained stayed under the order of Court shall be excluded.

(10) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Authority prescribed under sub-section (5) of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under sub- section (6) may, within such time and in such manner, as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act, appeal to the High Court.

Explanation.- For the purpose of this Act, market value of any property shall be estimated to be price which, in the opinion of the Controller or the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority or the High Court, as the case may be, such property would have fetched or would fetch, if sold in the open market on the date of execution of the instrument of conveyance, exchange, gift, release or benami right or settlement."

(3.)The appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.15790 of 2019 is taken as the lead matter and facts pertaining to said appeal are set out in detail for facility. The facts involved in other appeals are almost identical except for details such as the case numbers, dates of orders and the details of properties in question.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.