Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 23.7.2014, passed by the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Saran Division Chapra, in Stamp Case No. 15/2014, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to deposit the deficit stamp fees along with penalty to the tune of Rs. 19,08,000/-.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the donors, namely, Ramnath Singh and Smt. Kailasho Devi, had executed a deed of gift in favour of the petitioner, who is the daughter-in-law of the said donors and in pursuance thereof, the deed of gift was registered by the District Sub-Registrar, Siwan on 5.5.2014.

3. The legal issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner for consideration by this Court is that admittedly, the gift deed in question was registered on 5.5.2014, hence, the District Sub-Registrar, Siwan, thereafter, had no authority under the law to refer the matter, pertaining to fresh determination of the market value of the property in question & the duty payable thereon, to the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Saran at Chapra, inasmuch as admittedly, the District Sub-Registrar, Siwan had referred the matter to the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Saran at Chapra, vide letter dated 11.6.2014, as has been stated in the impugned order dated 23.7.2014 i.e. after registration of the Gift deed on 5.5.2014.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Respondents has submitted that the order dated 23.7.2014, passed by the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Saran at Chapra in Stamp Case No. 15/2014 does not suffer any infirmity and has been rightly passed for recovery of the deficit stamp duty, inasmuch as the District Sub-Registrar, Siwan had obtained a report from the concerned C.O., Basantpur to the effect that the land in question is situated besides the State Highway and has got commercial and residential value, hence, the land in question was undervalued by the petitioner for the purposes of registration of the gift deed in question. Thus, it is submitted that the Assistant Inspector General (Registration), Saran at Chapra, has rightly directed the petitioner to deposit the deficit stamp fees, vide order dated 23.7.2014 passed in Stamp Case No. 15/2014.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the materials on record from which it is apparent that the District Sub-Registrar, Siwan had referred the matter to the Inspector General (Registration), Saran Division, Chapra, vide letter dated 11.6.2014, as has been recorded in the impugned order dated 23.7.2014, purportedly under Section 47A (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [as amended by the Indian Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 2013, published in the gazette on 03.05.2013], which is reproduced herein below:—

"(1) Where the registering officers appointed under the Registration Act, 1908 while registering any instrument of conveyance, exchange, gift, partition or settlement is satisfied that the classification of the property and/or the measurement of the structure contained in the property which is subject matter of such instrument has been set forth wrongly or the market value of the property, which is subject matter of such instrument has been set forth at a lower rate than the Guideline Register of Estimated Minimum Value prepared under the rules framed under the provision of this Act, he shall refer such instrument before registering it to the Collector for determination of the proper market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon."

6. It is apparent from a bare perusal of Section 47A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 that the registering authority can refer the matter, only before registering the document in question, to the Collector / the Assistant Inspector General, for determination of the proper market value of such property and the duty payable thereon. As far as the present case is concerned, it is an admitted fac