- (1.) V. K. Mittal, C. C. R. A. This revision has been preferred under Section 56 (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 against the order dated 16- 4-2001 passed by the Collector, Sravasti.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant papers on file. The main grounds of revision are that the proceedings have been initiated on a complaint against the sale deed dated 26-6- 2000 and action has been taken suo-motu; no show cause notice has been given; the spot inspection was done in the absence of the parties. The inspection memo is not on the file and that the land in question has got not been declared as abadi under Section 143 of U. P. Z. A & L. R. Act. From the perusal of file it is evident that Sri Chandramani Kant Singh brought to the notice of the Collector the fact that there is evasion of stamp duty in the sale of property mentioned therein. It is not correct to say that no show cause notice was issued while notice was served to the parties; the prove is on file. It is also not correct to say that the Collector has assessed the stamp duty deeming it as abadi. The basis of stamp duty is also on file which is Paper No. 26 of the lower Court file. The assessment has been made on the basis of circle rate, for the agricultural land which is situate on Bhinga Laxmanpur road near P. S. Kotwali as well as opposite to Junior High School.
(3.) IN these circumstances I find that the Collector has passed a well reasoned order giving detailed justification for evaluating the price of land and thus the stamp duty. I, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 16-4-2001 which is liable to be sustained. In the result, the revision fails and is hereby dismissed and the impugned order dated 16-4-2001 is hereby confirmed. Let the recovery proceedings be initiated accordingly. Revision dismissed. .;