U.K.Dhaon, S.K.Jain, JJ. - (1.) Heard Sri N.K. Seth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned Standing Counsel.
(2.) The petitioners have approached this Court against the impugned order dated 27.9.2004 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Lucknow and the demand notice dated 20.1.2005. The petitioners have alleged that through a registered sale deed dated 16.4.2003, they have purchased house No. 17/1, Ashok Marg, Lucknow for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1.55 crore on which a stamp duty of Rs. 15.53 Lakh was paid. The petitioners have further alleged that the opposite party No. 3 has issued a notice under Section 47-A/33 of the Indian Stamp Act read with Rule 350 to the petitioner No. 1 asking him to show cause and appear on 30.8.2003 as there is deficiency of the stamp duty. The petitioner No. 1 after the receipt of the notice submitted the detailed objection dated 29.8.2003 stating, inter alia, that in the lease deed executed by the Nazool Officer in favour of Sri Har Charan Singh, the plot area is mentioned as 11029 Sq. which is the same as mentioned in the sale deed dated 16.4.2003. It was also dated that the property purchased through the sale deed is not a corner property and the house constructed over the plot is at a distance of more than 20 meters from the centers of Ashok Marg, Lucknow and the stamp duty paid by the petitioners on the sale deed was proper.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that before passing the impugned order dated 27.9.2004 the A.D.M. (Finance & Revenue), Lucknow has not afforded any opportunity to the petitioners and the impugned order was passed in a most arbitrary and illegal manner ignoring the objection preferred by the petitioner. He further submitted that at the time of sale deed the house was a residential property, however, in order to avoid unnecessary harassment at the hands of the opposite parties, the petitioners for the purpose of the stamp duty and registration had valued the said property at the rate fixed by the Collector, Lucknow for the commercial land i.e. at the rate of 11,300/- per Sq. Mtr. and since it is situated on road more than 9 meter wide, consequently, for the purpose of the stamp duty and registration additional 10% was added to the value and for the purpose of stamp duty and registration construction of the house was valued considering it to be a residential house which was being used for residential purposes and although the petitioners were entitled to a depreciation of approx. 30% on the constructed portion of the house but no deduction towards the depreciation while calculating the value of the said house for the purpose of stamp duty and registration was made. He further submitted that the area of the plot over which the house of the petitioners exists is 11029 Sq. Ft. for which, a freehold deed was also executed by the Nazool Officer and the plot is not a corner plot as alleged by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue). He further submitted that 11.5.2004 was a local holiday at Lucknow on account of Mahabirji-Ka-Mela and 25.7.2004 was Sunday but the Order sheet -shows that the case was taken up by the A.D.M. (Finance & Revenue) on those dates also and orders were passed. He further submitted that the impugned order dated 27.9.2004 and the demand notice dated 20.1.2005 deserve to be quashed by this Hon'ble Court.;