Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—Heard Smt. Rama Goyal, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.K. Chaubey, the learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P.

2. The petitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the order dated 17th July, 2006 passed by the Collector Jhansi, whereby deficiency of stamp duty and penalty has been imposed under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 29th November, 2007 whereby the revision of the petitioner has been rejected by the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi under Section 56 (1) of the Stamp Act.

3. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition is, that the petitioner had purchased 250 square meters of land vide a registered sale-deed dated 3rd March, 2004 which was located in Civil Lines, Jhansi. The stamp duty was paid at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per square meter treating it to be a residential plot. The sale-deed records that Rs. 1,26,000/- was paid towards stamp duty and Rs. 5,000/- was paid towards registration charges. It transpires that a complaint was made and, on that basis, an enquiry report was submitted by the Deputy Inspector General (Stamps) stating therein that the plot in question was located and surrounded by commercial buildings near the “Elite crossing” in Jhansi and that the land had a potential value of Rs. 10,000/- per square meter. On the basis of this report, the Collector initiated proceedings under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act.

4. The petitioner filed his objections stating therein that the stamp duty was paid on the basis of the prescribed rate of Rs. 5,000/- per square meter and that the land in question was a residential land and that it was purchased for residential purposes. The petitioner also filed evidence namely, sale-deeds of adjoining areas by way of examplar and also filed the circle rate as well as the master plan of the city of Jhansi showing the length of a bazaar street.

5. The Collector without considering the circle rate and other evidence filed by the petitioner relied upon the report of the Deputy Inspector General dated 29th March, 2004 and held that there was a deficiency of stamp duty and that the petitioner had concealed material facts. The authority found that the land in question was surrounded by commercial buildings and that it was 116 meters from the main road of “Elite crossing” in Civil Lines, Jhansi, and therefore, the land in question had a potential value of Rs. 10,000/- per square meter and, accordingly, assessed the value of the land at Rs. 25,10,000/- and held that Rs. 2,51,000/- was payable towards stamp duty. The authority found that only Rs, 1,25,000/- was paid as stamp duty, and accordingly, by its order, directed the petitioner to pay the deficiency of stamp duty amounting to Rs. 1,25,000/- and also imposed a similar amount towards penalty.

6. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, filed a revision under Section 56 (1) of the Act along with a stay application. It transpires that the revisional authority directed the petitioner to deposit the entire amount and, based on the said direction, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 3,27,300/- on 20th July, 2007 which included deficiency of stamp duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 2,50,000/- and interest at the rate of 18% per annum amounting to Rs. 77,300/-.

7. The revisional authority, during its pendency of the revision, directed the A.D.M. (F & R) to make a spot inspection and submit a report which was submitted in which it was indicated that the circle rate of that area was Rs. 6,000/- per square meter upto 50 meters from the main road; Rs. 5000/- per sq meter between 50 meters to 150 meters and, beyond 150 meters, the rate was Rs. 4,000/- per square meter. The A.D.M. further reported that the plot-in-question was approximately 119 meters from the main road. The Commissioner, without considering this report, has relied upon the report of the Deputy Inspector General (Stamps) dated 29th Ma