The document does not need to be produced as evidence for proceedings under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, and proceedings under Section 33 and 47a can be initiated even after registration.

( 1 ) THE proceeding under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act was initiated against the petitioner. Mr. A. B. Singh. learned counsel for the petitioner contends that unless the document is produced as an evidence before the officer, no proceeding under Section 33 could be Initiated and as such the proceeding is invalid. He secondly contends that there was a general circular by the Collector under which if the land is below 16 decimal it could not be valued as an urban land. Admittedly, the land is an agricultural land as would be apparent from the Tahsildars report. Therefore, it cannot be valued on the said basts. He also contended that the document was registered and that no proceeding under Section 47a could be initiated once the document is registered. Such proceeding can be initiated only before the registration is done. Therefore, in no manner this proceeding can be proceeded with validly.

( 2 ) THE submission of Mr. A. B. Singh does not appear to be sound so far as the Sections 33 and 47a are concerned. In as much as Section 33 does not require that the document is to be produced in evidence. A plain reading of Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act shows that every person having by law or consent of parties authority to receive evidence, or every person in charge of a public office, except a police Officer, before whom any instrument, chargeable with duty is produced or comes in the performance of his functions, he may impound the same if it appears to him that such instrument is not duly stamped which in his opinion is required to be stamped. Thus, it is not clear that the document is not required to be produced in evidence but it is necessary who is capable of receiving the document in evidence or a person in charge of a public office before whom a document comes in discharge of his function of such office, he has the authority to impound such document.

( 3 ) APART from sub-section (1) as referred to above, sub-section (4) of Section 33, as amended in u. P. , prescribes that even if a copy of such document is produced before the Collector or such officer who might be held to hold public office by Government notification may also take steps for determination of the stamp payable. But by reason of proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 33 as amended in U. P. , such proceeding cannot be initiated after four years from date of execution of the instrument which necessarily implies that such a proceeding can be initiated even after registration and by reason of sub-section (5) of Section 33 as amended in U. P. , the deficit stamp duty is to be realised with penalty on the copy of the instrument if the document is not produced. Therefore, a person holding public office has every right to refer the matter for recovery of stamp duty and, therefore, the proceeding cannot be held to be void. Jn his case it is pointed out in the order itself that the proceeding was under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act.

( 4 ) SIMILARLY, Section 47a in subsection (4) empowers that the Collector either on a reference or suo motu to examine a document to satisfy himself as to the correctness of the market value of the property, subject-matter of such instrument is as to whether proper duty paid or not or to determine the market value set forth in the instrument. Therefore, this provision necessarily implies that even after registration a proceeding under Section 47a can be initiated with the only limitation that such proceeding could be initiated only within four years from the date of registration of such instrument as provided in sub-section (4 ).

( 5 ) SIMILARLY, sub-section (2) of Section 47a also prescribes that without prejudice to the provision of sub-section (1), while registering any instrument, the registering officer after registering such instrument may refer the same to the Collector for determination of the market value of such property and proper duty payable thereon, if he believes that the market value of the property