SHRI SUMATI NATH JAIN Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
LAWS(ALL)-2016-1-397
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 14,2016

Shri Sumati Nath Jain Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Yashwant Varma, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by the judgment and order rendered by the learned Single Judge on 21 December 2015, dismissing a writ petition and relegating him to the alternative remedy, the original petitioner is in appeal before us.
(2.) The writ petition challenged an order dated 26 October 2015 passed by the second respondent in purported exercise of powers conferred under Sections 47-A and 33 of the Indian Stamp Act 18991. The order impugned held the petitioner-appellant liable to pay additional stamp duty of Rs. 7,14,650/- and penalty of Rs. 1,78,663/-, thus totalling Rs. 8,93,313/-. The order imposing additional stamp duty is on an instrument executed in favour of the appellant on 26 September 2011, being a sale deed in respect of Khasra No. 786 admeasuring 0.7160 hectares. This instrument, upon presentation in the office of the Sub Registrar, Gautam Budh Nagar and on payment of stamp duty of Rs. 1,07,600/- had been duly registered and returned to the appellant.
(3.) From the material brought on record of the writ petition, it appears that a copy of the instrument in question fell for scrutiny before the Sub Registrar, Gautambudh Nagar who on 7 December 2012 put up a note for consideration of the second respondent asserting therein that the instrument was in respect of a property, which had been valued at agricultural rates. In the opinion of the Sub Registrar, the property comprised in the instrument was liable to be taxed @ Rs. 6,500/- per square meter being the circle rate prescribed by the second respondent for residential properties. Consequently, the Sub Registrar opined that the instrument should be subjected to additional stamp of Rs. 7,14,650/-. Taking note of the aforesaid report, the second respondent assumed jurisdiction and issued a notice dated 30 August 2012 informing the appellant that proceedings in respect of the adequacy of stamp duty paid on the instrument in question were pending before him and that prima facie it appears that the appellant has evaded stamp duty to the extent of Rs. 7,14,650/-. This notice accordingly called upon the appellant to participate and show cause why additional stamp duty together with penalty be not imposed upon him. The appellant filed his response in the proceedings on 28 December 2012. During the pendency of the proceedings, he is stated to have gifted the property comprised in the instrument to his wife Smt. Vijaya Jain on 17 December 2012.;


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