Hemant Gupta. J.:- The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order passed by Collector, Hoshiarpur on April 15, 2008 and the order dated June 3, 2008 passed by Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar in proceeding under Section 47-A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short the ‘Act’) in respect of instrument of sale-deed dated May 24, 2006 alleging the same to be under-valued for the purpose of stamp duty.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Act have been initiated on the basis of audit report after one and a half year of registration of instrument thus, the said proceedings are illegal and in contravention of judgment of this Court Abhinav Kumar versus State of Haryana, 2001 (1) PLR 598.

3. Section 47-A, sub clause 3 of the Act contemplates initiation of proceedings by the Collector within a period of three years from the date of registration of the instrument. In view of the said fact, when the order passed by the Collector itself is within the period of three years from the date of registration of the instrument, it cannot be held that initiation of proceedings after one and a half year of the registration of the instrument is illegal or in any way, contravenes the provisions of the Act. In Abhinav Kumar’s case (supra) provisions of Section 47-A (3) were not brought to the notice of the Court substituted vide Punjab Act No. 17 of 1994.

In view of the said statutory provision, the judgment of this Court cannot be said to be binding precedent and is per-incuriarum. Thus, finding no merit in the writ petition, the same is dismissed.

----------------