Hon’ble Suneet Kumar, J.—Petitioner purchased part of the property Khasra No. 1621/01 admeasuring 0.072 hectare, situated within municipal area, vide instrument dated 4.1.2008, On reference by the Sub Registrar, a case was registered under Indian Stamp Act 1899 (the Act). It was reported that the property in question was under valued, not disclosing that the property has commercial potential, whereas stamp duty was paid as applicable on agricultural property. The Collector (Stamp) Bijnor, inspected the property during the proceedings and found that the property is situated behind a Hospital in ward No. 1, a commercial shop measuring 50 square metre exists on the property in question, a godown of 200 square metre and an area of 470 square metre of commercial property on a portion of the parcel of land of which the property in question is a part. Under Uttar Pradesh Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules 1997 (1997 Rules) minimum value (circle rate) fixed by the Collector was @ Rs. 8000/- per square metre for land and for covered area Rs. 60/- per month was the rental value, accordingly, deficiency of stamp duty of Rs. 7,66,400/- was determined, Rs. 76,000/- was imposed as penalty alongwith interest @ 1.5% from the date duty was due.

2. Aggrieved, by the order dated 23.2.2010, passed by the Collector, petitioner preferred appeal before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority/Commissioner, Moradabad Division inter alia stating that the order passed by the Collector was an ex parte order, the property is recorded in the revenue record as an agricultural property, was not being used for non agricultural purposes, the petitioner has paid stamp duty on the instrument as payable on agricultural property.

3. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal vide order dated 23.2.2010, affirming the order passed by the Collector.

4. The petitioner by means of this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is challenging the order dated 9.9.2009 passed by the Collector, Bijnor and the appellate order dated 22.3.2010.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. The only submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the property in question though situated within the municipal area is recorded as an agricultural property, hence stamp duty was accordingly paid, it was not open for the Collector to impose stamp duty treating the property as a commercial property.

7. In rebuttal, the learned standing counsel has defended the impugned orders and would submit that the value of the property is to be determined on the potential of the property irrespective of the nature of the property as recorded in the revenue records.

8. The facts are not in dispute. The property is situated within municipal area, activities in and around the property is purely commercial. The property is a small part admeasuring 0.072 Hectare, of Khasra No. 1621/1, other properties situated on the same Khasra (plot) are of commercial nature namely shop (50 Square Metre), godown 200 square metre and commercial use of 470 square metre.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the nature of the commercial activity in and around the property in question, minimum value (circle rate) of commercial property in the area is also not being disputed.

10. The question for determination is as to whether a property recorded in the revenue records as a agricultural property could be charged with stamp duty as applicable to a commercial property irrespective of the potential of the property in question.

11. The Indian Stamp Act 1899 is a law relating to revenue/stamps. Its applicability thus stands restricted to the scheme of the Act. The Stamp Act is a fiscal measure enacted with an object to secure revenue for the State on certain classes of instrument.

12. It is not enacted to arm a litigant with a weapon of technicality to defect the case of the Revenue. The stringent provisions of the Act are