The market value of the property should be determined with reference to the date of execution of the document, and the usage of the land in the future cannot be a basis for assessing the value.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 47-A(10) of Indian Stamp Act 1899 against the impugned proceedings of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.37503/N3/2017, dated 06.01.2022 and quash the same.)

1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order passed in Na.Ka.No.37503/N3/2017, dated 06.01.2022 by the Tamil Nadu Chief Revenue Controlling Officer/Inspector General of Registration.

2. The factual aspects that are necessary for deciding the appeal in short are as follows:

(a) The appellant is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, manufacturing carbon steel, low alloy steel and stainless steel castings and forgings. The appellant Company purchased the property situated in Survey Nos.229/1D, 229/3D, 229/4A, 235/2B, 235/2G of Lakshmipatti Village, Kulathur Sub Registration District, Pudukottai District admeasuring 2.71 acres of land from one K.V.Abdul Mubarak Vagaiyara for Rs.3,30,000/- vide sale deed dated 15.02.2017. They have paid stamp duty of Rs.54,100/- on 15.02.2017 and the document was registered in Document No.388/2017. Subsequently, the third respondent referred the above said document to the second respondent for undervaluation as per Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act. The appellant Company received Form-I notice under Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu Stamp (Prevention of undervaluation of instruments) Rules 1968 directing them to pay an additional stamp duty of Rs.5,27,250/-.

(b) Aggrieved by the said Form-I notice, the appellant Company has preferred an appeal before the second respondent on 05.05.2017. The second respondent has passed an order in Tha.Pa.No.376/2017, dated 18.05.2017 directing the appellant to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs.5,27,250/- by fixing the market value of the subject property at Rs.755/-per sq.metre. Aggrieved by the said order of the second respondent, the appellant Company has preferred an appeal under Section 47A(5) of the Indian Stamp Act before the first respondent.

(c) The first respondent has passed an order issuing his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.37503/N3/2017, dated 06.01.2022 fixing the value of the property at Rs.650/- per sq.metre and directed the appellant to pay the deficit stamp duty within two months. Challenging the above impugned order, the appellant Company has preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

3. The learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that the appellant Company to expand its business operations, purchased the property in question, that the appellant approached the third respondent and enquired about the stamp duty to be paid for the above said sale deed, that the third respondent has given the amount to be paid and asked the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.54,100/- on the estimated market value of Rs.7.70 Lakhs per hectare for an extent of 1.10.00 hectares, that when the appellant Company was expecting for the returning of the original sale deed, the third respondent refused to return the original sale deed and kept the document as pending and referred the said document to the second respondent for undervaluation as per Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, that the guideline value of the property in dispute is only Rs.5,93,500/- per hectare, that though the land in dispute is not used for agricultural purpose, the same cannot be categorized as commercial land, that though the impugned order has been passed on 06.01.2022, the same was received by the appellant on 04.02.2022, that nearly 5 years has been lapsed from the date of registration and that therefore, the impugned order of the first respondent is without jurisdiction.

4. The main contention of the appellant is that before registration of the sale deed, they have approached the third respondent and enquired about the stamp duty to be payable for the purchase of the property in question and that only on the basis of the valuation given by the third respondent, the property in question was valued at Rs.7.70Lakhs and stamp duty was paid at Rs.54,100/-. It