JUDGMENT

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.

While requesting to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, the petitioner inter-alia prays for setting aside the order dated 10.03.2016 passed by the Commissioner, Gurugram, in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction under the Indian STAMP ACT , 1899 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1899 Act').

2. After having heard the learned counsels representing the parties at length, the following question requires adjudication:-

(i) On execution of the deed of assignment of debt between Financial creditors and asset construction company (hereinafter referred to as "ARC"), whether the stamp duty is payable on the total debt assigned or the amount paid or promised to be paid by ARC to the Financial creditor?

3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, the following relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed:-

On 05.03.2008, a deed of assignment of debt was executed between the petitioner, IFCI Ltd. (Financial Creditor) and Asset Care Enterprises Ltd. (hereinafter "ACE"). It was provided in the assignment deed that IFCI is the absolute owner of the rights, title and interest created under the financial documents, including the receivables and security interest created thereunder. On 15.02.2007, an aggregate of Rs.84,49,38,818/- including the principal amount of Rs.2,42,99,836/- and interest of Rs.82,06,38,982/- was outstanding against the respondent. Vide agreement dated 12.09.2007, IFCI agreed to assign the financial asset to the ACE. However, before the assignment could be completed, a tripartite agreement was entered into and the petitioner (M/s Dhir & Dhir Asset Reconstruction & Securitization Company Ltd.) agreed to pay Rs.3,04,00,000/- to the IFCI and ACE. The deed of assignment was executed on stamp paper of Rs.80/-. On 16.04.2010, a complaint alleging evasion of stamp duty was submitted to the Collector-cum-Registrar, Rewari by respondent no.1 (borrower-loanee). The Collector assessed an additional stamp duty of Rs.18,24,000/-while calculating the stamp duty @ 6% on the purchase consideration of Rs.3,04,00,000/-. The petitioner deposited the amount. Respondent no.1 filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority which was allowed by the Commissioner, Gurugram, while directing them to pay stamp duty of Rs.5,06,96,338/-. Challenging the correctness of the aforesaid order, the writ petition has been filed.

4. Heard the learned counsels representing the parties at length, perused the paper book and their written submissions.

5. The learned counsel representing the petitioner has made the following submissions:-

(i) "It is a settled principle of law that the Stamp Duty is payable only on the consideration value. In this case, the debt was assigned by IFCI to the Petitioner for Rs. 3.04 crores. The Petitioner had initially paid stamp duty of Rs. 80/-, as there was no provision under the Indian Stamp Act, (as applicable to the State of Haryana) for Assignment Deed and therefore, the same was done under the head "registration of any other document". Thereafter, in the Order passed by the Collector on 25.04.2012 (Annexure P-3, pg 65), the duty was calculated at 6% on the consideration value of Rs.3.04 crores and the ARC paid the entire stamp duty of Rs. 18,24,000/- on 04.04.2012. The said order dated 25.04.2012 was challenged by Respondent no.1 before Commissioner of Stamps, Haryana. The Commissioner vide order dated 10.03.2016 directed the Petitioner to pay stamp duty on the transaction amoun