O R D E R

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents to refund the excess stamp duty of Rs.4,09,481/- paid by the petitioner for the sale deed executed in his favour dated 01.06.2022.

2. The petitioner purchased the property bearing Plot No.58, Old No.58(1), Manikodi Srinivasan Nagar Main Road, Seevaram, Perungudi,Chennai 600 096 from one A.Ganasoundari, vide sale deed dated 01.06.2022 registered with 4th respondent. The extent of the land purchased is 2400 sq.ft along with building measuring 1100 sq.ft. The sale consideration for the said property was arrived at Rs.1,00,00,000/- based on the fact, the property was assessed to building tax by the Corporation of Chennai as a building facing Manikodi Srinivasan Nagar Main Road, Seevaram. In Annexure IA attached to the sale deed the value of the said land was mentioned as Rs.40,20,000/- and the value of the building was mentioned as Rs.59,80,000/-. The value of the land was arrived at only on the ground that the property is facing Manikodi Srinivasan Nagar Main Road, Seevaram. The 4th respondent entertained a doubt with regard to the valuation adopted by the petitioner mainly on the ground that the property is facing two streets, one on the northern side namely industrial road and the other on the southern side namely Manikodi Srinivasan Nagar Main Road, Seevaram. The 4th respondent referred the document to second respondent under Section 47(A) of Stamp Act. Thereafter, the second respondent issued “Form-I” notice under Rule 4 of Tamil Nadu Stamp (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules 1968, stating that the land value was Rs.92,52,000/- as against Rs.40,20,000/- mentioned in the annexure IA to the sale deed. The petitioner submitted an objection on the ground that the property was assessed to tax by Corporation of Chennai, as if, it is located in Manikodi Srinivasan Nagar Main Road, Seevaram and therefore, the guideline value applicable to that road was taken into consideration by the petitioner while arriving at land value.

3. The petitioner also brought to the notice of the second respondent that the building value was arrived at by the petitioner as Rs.59,80,000/- which is much more than the value fixed by PWD for the superstructure. The petitioner requested the second respondent to take into consideration the excess stamp duty paid by the petitioner regarding building by valuing the building on higher side and adjust the excess stamp duty paid on the value of the building towards the Deficit Stamp Duty payable on the value of the land arrived at by the authorities. However, the second respondent passed an order directing the petitioner to pay Deficit Stamp Duty of Rs.3,66,240/- based on the higher valuation arrived at for the land treating the property as located in industrial road. The request of the petitioner for giving set off to the excess stamp duty paid on the value of the building has not been considered.

4. It is also stated by the petitioner that he paid Deficit Stamp Duty as demanded by the second respondent under protest and got release of the document due to urgency. Since the second respondent has not considered the request of the petitioner to get refund of excess stamp duty paid on the value of the building, the petitioner has come by way of this writ petition seeking necessary direction to refund the excess stamp duty collected on the value of the building.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner by relying on the PWD valuation for the building situated in the subject property submitted that the petitioner on his own valuation in the Annexure IA to the sale deed valued the building on higher side and paid excess stamp duty and therefore, he is entitled to refund of the same.

6. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner voluntarily declared valuation of the building at Rs.59,80,000/- in Annexure IA to the sale deed and hence, it is not open to him to turn around