IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.
Rishu Raj, Son of Kaushalendra Kumar and Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Excise, Prohibition and Registration Department and Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17837 of 2023
Decided On : 28-08-2024
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 – Section 47-A(1) – Deficit Stamp Duty on registration of sale-deed – Registering Authority has no authority/jurisdiction to refer the matter to the AIG Registration for determination of proper market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon, after registration of sale deed – Action of the District Sub-Registrar and AIG Registration is arbitrary and perverse and against the mandate of Section 47-A of the Act, 1899. (Para 8)
State of Bihar Vs. Smt. Tetra Devi, 2018 (3) PLJR 136; Shahnaz Begam Vs. State of Bihar, 2018(2) PLJR 293 – Relied.
JUDGMENT :
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J.)
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.06.2023, passed by the Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Patna Division, Patna i.e. the respondent no. 4 in Deficit Stamp Case No. 37 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been directed to pay deficit stamp duty to the tune of a sum of Rs. 1,54,400/- + a penalty of Rs. 15,440/- totalling to a sum of Rs. 1,69,840/-.
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioners, are that they purchased a residential flat bearing Flat No. 204A along with car parking in the basement, in a multi storied apartment in the name and style of Raj Complex, situated at Mauza-Dasaratha, Thana-Phulwarisharif, P.S. Beur, District-Patna vide registered sale deed dated 24.03.2023, executed at the office of the Sub Registrar, Patna, after payment of the requisite stamp duty and registration charges. The petitioners had subsequently received notice in connection with Deficit Stamp Case No. 37 of 2023, whereafter they had appeared and filed their objections, nonetheless, the impugned order dated 28.06.2023 has been passed by the respondent no. 4.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that reference can be made by the Registering Officer for determination of the proper market value of the property in question, if he is satisfied that the classification of the property or the measurement of the structure contained in the property is wrong or the market value of the property has been set forth at a lower rate than the Guideline register of Estimated Minimum Value, only before registering the instrument in question, however in the present case, the Sub-Registrar, Patna has referred the matter to the respondent no. 4 only after registration of the sale deed on 24.03.2023, hence the said reference itself is bad in law.
4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1899’), which is reproduced herein below:-
Provided that where the market value of the property of the instruments described above has been fixed at an amount which is not less than the value prescribed in the Guide Line Register of estimated minimum value prepared under the rules framed under the provisions of this Act, but the registering officer has reasons to believe that the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument has not been rightly set forth or it is higher than the estimated minimum value, he after registering such instrument, shall refer it by assigning proper reasons to the Collector for determination of proper market value of the property and the proper duty payable thereon.
5. In this connection, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioners has referred to a judgment rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court, reported in 2018 (3) PLJR 136 (The State of Bihar and others vs. Smt. Tetra Devi), paragraphs no. 14 and 15 whereof, are reproduced hereinbelow :-
The Registering Authority must refer matters for market value determination before registration; post-registration references are invalid under Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Post-registration assessment of deficit stamp duty is invalid if conducted beyond statutory time limits, confirming jurisdictional authority restrictions under the Indian Stamp Act.
The court ruled that a registration officer cannot refer a property valuation issue after the registration of a deed, as per Section 47(A)(1) of the Indian Stamp Act.
Post-registration authority to determine stamp duty is limited by time constraints and must adhere to statutory provisions.
The authority cannot demand additional stamp duty post-registration beyond the statutory time limit, rendering such actions invalid.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.