Court auctions dictate the valid market value of properties, precluding stamp authorities from imposing differing assessments of duty.

JUDGMENT :

B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.

1. The above Writ Petition is filed seeking to quash and set aside the impugned demand notice dated 7th February 2024 issued by the Office of Respondent No.1. By the impugned demand notice, the Petitioner is called upon to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs.83,60,550/- and a penalty of Rs.23,41,000/-. This stamp duty and penalty is levied on the basis that the value of the property purchased by Petitioner No.1 under an auction conducted by Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee constituted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is Rs.16,72,11,000/- [as per the valuation of the Stamp Authorities]. According to the Petitioners, the principles on which the market value of the property is determined itself is bad because the sale was conducted by the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee constituted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and therefore the true market value of the property has to be the value at which the property was sold to Petitioner No.1. The property in question is land together with the building thereon comprising of plots collectively admeasuring about 2160 sq.mtrs. bearing Gat No.107, 108 and 109 having plinth/Plot No.229 in Ambey Valley City, Pune, Maharashtra [for short the “said property”]. This, in effect, is the controversy in the present Petition.

2. Before we delve into the rival contentions it would only be appropriate to set out very brief facts. By an order dated 10th May 2018 passed in Civil Appeal No.20971 of 2017, the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia (i) constituted a Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee to deal with and conduct the sale of the assets of one Citrus Check Inn Ltd. (“CCIL”), and Royal Twinkle Star Club Limited (“RTSCL”), and all their associate/sister concerns; (ii) directed the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee to appoint registered valuers to value the properties unearthed during insolvency process of CCIL and RTCL and all their associate/sister concerns; (iii) directed that the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee would comprise of the Resolution Professional, one SEBI Representative, one Investor Representative and one Representative of CCIL and RTSCL and their associate/sister concerns; and (iv) directed that all properties of CCIL, RTSCL as well as assets and other properties of their associate/sister concerns were to be attached. Pursuant to this attachment, it was directed that after the valuation of each of the properties was done, the sale of each of these properties would take place under aegis of the Hon’ble NCLT. There were also subsequent orders passed wherein it was inter alia clarified that in selling properties under the aegis of the Supreme Court, the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee was to follow the procedure laid down by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.

3. Pursuant to these directions, the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee, from time to time, issued tenders and sold some of the properties belonging to CCIL and RTSCL and all its associate/sister concerns. One such tender was issued by the Sale-cum-Monitoring Committee on 8th March 2022 for e-auction of various properties of CCIL, RTSCL and its associate and/or sister concerns. The said e- auction was to take place on 6th April 2022 and one of the properties in this e-auction was the said property. Petitioner No.1 participated in the said e-auction and tendered its bid for the said property [listed at serial No.45 of the tender document] for a lump sum consideration of Rs.2,51,00,000/-. For the said property, Petitioner No.1 emerged as the highest bidder in the said e-auction. Accordingly, the Sale-cum- Monitoring Committee, under Regulation 33 of the 2016 Regula