Errors in the determination of market value and levy of stamp duty, need for consolidation of proceedings, compliance with natural justice requirements.

N.V. Anjaria, J.

1. The petitioner questions the legality of order dated 23rd March, 2006 passed by respondent No. 2-Chief Controlling Revenue Authority in Revision Application of the petitioner filed under Section 53(1) of the Bombay Stamp Act (now Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958).

2. Also challenged is the order dated 29th October, 2001 passed by Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation Organisation which was taken before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority whereby the Deputy Collector demanded deficit stamp duty of Rs. 02,70,990/- plus penalty of Rs. 250/-, aggregating to Rs. 02,71,240/- from the petitioner in respect of Sale Deed dated 29th September, 2000. The respondent No. 2 confirmed the said order.

3. It is necessary to set out relevant facts. The petitioner purchased bungalow No. 18-B, Navjivan (Kalyan) Cooperative Housing Society Limited by getting executed two Deeds of Sale in part. The first floor of the bungalow along with undivided interest in the land having construction of 98 Sq. Meters approximately came to be purchased by registered Sale Deed dated 18th January, 2000 for a consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/-. For the ground floor along with cellar and undivided interest in the land of the very bungalow admeasuring 174 Sq. Meters area inclusive of cellar, came to be purchased by way of another Sale Deed dated 29th September, 2000. Consideration for the same was Rs. 22,00,000/-.

3.1 It appears that in exercise of powers under Section 32A of the Act read with Rule 4(i) of the Bombay Stamp Determination of Market Value of Property Rules, 1984, the Deputy Collector issued a notice dated 29th December, 2000 in respect of the said document being registered Sale Deed No. 3235 dated 29th September, 2000. The petitioner was asked to show cause as to why market value of the property should not be determined as Rs. 49,52,300/-, which resulted into the impugned order.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Rathod for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Tirthraj Pandya for the respondent authorities.

4.1 As noticed, the purchase of the property-bungalow by the petitioner was divided into two registered Sale Deeds as above. The first Sale Deed was in respect of first floor with 98 Sq. Meters of construction area where consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/- was passed and amount of Rs. 01,98,625/- towards stamp duty was paid on the basis of the market value determined at Rs. 26,48,300/-, as per order dated 20th November, 2004 of respondent No. 3-Deputy Collector. The petitioner paid Rs. 1,35,000/- at the time of execution. It appears that deficit stamp duty of Rs. 63,625/- was demanded in respect of the said transaction-Sale Deed. The petitioner paid Rs. 31,815/- on 07th January, 2005 towards the said demand taking benefit under the Amnesty Scheme. The other sale document involved the part of the same bungalow, that is ground floor and basement, having constructed area of 174 Sq. Meters and 480 Sq. Meters land area. The consideration for the said sale was Rs. 22,00,000/-. At the time of execution of the said second Sale Deed, stamp duty of Rs. 02,20,000/- was paid. The Deputy Collector, however, by aforesaid order dated 29th September, 2000 fixed the market value for the said part of the property conveyed at Rs. 49,09,823/-, consequently Rs. 04,90,990/- plus penalty of Rs. 250/-came to be adjudged to be payable by the petitioner. The deficit stamp duty was demanded by the authorities as per the orders impugned.

5. From the facts narrated above, it is seen that in respect of the second document of sale, order was passed on 29th October, 2001 by the Deputy Collector asking to pay deficit stamp duty of Rs. 02,70,990/- plus penalty of Rs. 250/-. It was an ex-parte order. When the said order was passed, the determination regarding stamp duty payable in respect of the first document of sale was not finalised. In fact, notice dated 25th March, 2004 came to be issued in respect of the first document dated 18th January,