VIBHU BAKHRU, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 03.09.2015 (hereafter “the impugned order”) passed by respondent no. 2 (hereafter “the Collector”), whereby the Collector has computed the deficit stamp duty at Rs.4,35,000/- and had also held that the petitioner would be liable to pay interest at the rate of 2% p.m. on compounded basis on the aforesaid deficit stamp duty from the date of execution of the Deed (i.e. 03.06.2013) till the date of preparing the challan.

2. The principal controversy involved in the present petition relates to the method of calculation of value of a residential flat at the notified circle rates.

3. Briefly stated, the relevant facts necessary to address the controversy involved are as under:-

3.1. The petitioner purchased a built up floor (the third floor) in a building constructed on property bearing no. RZ-320, Gali No. 20, Third Floor, Tughlakabad Extn., New Delhi by way of a Registered Sale Deed dated 03.06.2013. The said Deed reflected the total consideration paid by the petitioner at Rs.19,00,000/-. The said Deed was presented for registration on 03.06.2013 before respondent no. 3 (the Registering Authority) and was examined by the Collector.

3.2. On 02.07.2013, a notice was issued to the petitioner stating that the Sale Deed presented by the petitioner before respondent no.3 had been impounded under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereafter “the Act”) and had been referred to the Collector. Thereafter, by a notice dated 12.07.2013, the petitioner was also called upon to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on him under Section 26 of the Act.

3.3. Subsequently, by an order 23.05.2014, the Collector assessed the deficit stamp duty as Rs.2,83,440/- and also imposed a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/-

3.4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred a Revision Petition (Revision Petition No. 54/2015 captioned “Saji Varghese v. Collector of Stamps & Anr.”) before the Chief Controlling Authority. The said Revision Petition was disposed of by the impugned order.

4. A plain reading of the impugned order indicates that the Chief Controlling Authority had noticed that there are two methods for valuation of a built up property on the basis of the notified circle rates. The first method is by calculating the cost of land (that is, area of land multiplied by land rate per unit area) and then adding the value of construction (that is built up area multiplied by construction rate per unit area). And, the second method is by multiplying the built up area of flat by minimum rates for built up flats rate. The Chief Controlling Authority had proceeded on the basis that valuation carried out by either of the two methods only provides the floor limit of the value of the property and, therefore, the higher of the two valuations must be adopted as that alone would satisfy the requirement of Rule 4 of the Delhi Stamp (prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules 2007 (hereafter “the Rules”).

5. In terms of Section 3 of the Act, stamp duty is chargeable with the amount as indicated in Schedule I of the Act. In terms of the said Schedule, the stamp duty is chargeable ad valorem at the specified rate on the consideration as set forth in the instrument (in this case the sale deed).

6. Section 27 of the Act as applicable in Delhi is relevant and is set out below:-

“27. Facts affecting duty to be set forth in instrument.– The consideration (if any) and all other facts and circumstances affecting the chargeability of any instrument with duty, or the amount of the duty with which it is chargeable, shall be fully and truly set forth therein.

2. (1) In the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) as in force in the National Capital Territory of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “principal Act”), in section 27,-

(a) in sub-section (1), after the words