SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(All) 2297

MANISH MATHUR
Pawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Devi Patan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: R.S. Pande,Ankit Pande,Virendra Bhatt.
For the Respondent: C.S.C.

JUDGMENT

Manish Mathur, J.

Heard Mr. R.S. Pandey, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Virendra Bhatt, learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.

2. Petition has been filed assailing order dated 12.07.2002 passed under section 47A(3) of Indian STAMP ACT 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1899) whereby property which is subject matter of instrument of transfer was treated to be residential instead of agricultural and deficiency of stamp duty has been indicated thereupon along with penalty and interest. Appellate order dated 30.09.2002 dismissing Appeal under Section 56 of the Act of 1899 is also under challenge.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that a portion of plot no.582, area 0.15 acre miljumla in the Village in question was purchased jointly by petitioners by means of sale deed dated 27.10.1998. It is submitted that subsequently proceedings under Section 47-A of the Act of 1899 were drawn in pursuance of spot inspection report dated 05.02.2000 and have culminated in passing of impugned orders.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the entire basis of impugned order dated 12.07.2002 is only assumptio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top