Hon’ble Suneet Kumar, J.—Petitioner purchased plot No. 764/1M, 764/2M and 764/2 M and 764 M admeasuring 0.135 hectares vide instrument No. 697/04 dated 6.2.2004.

2. The Sub Registrar, Jaunpur on 24.2.2004, reported that the property in question is surrounded by a boundary wall and approximately 2000 square ft. tin shed was standing on pillars, earlier the property was used by Mahendra Tractors for service station, the property is surrounded by residential houses, hence, the property having commercial potential, had to be valued as a commercial property, accordingly deficient stamp duty of Rs. 5,74,000/- have to be recovered.

3. On reference, proceedings was instituted under the Indian Stamp Act 1899 (the Act), being case No. 1652 of 2004, the petitioner in objection to the notice urged that the sale-deed was executed for Rs. 11,00,000/- lacs, the property in question being recorded as an agricultural land in the revenue records, accordingly, stamp duty @ Rs. 50,000/- per decimal on agricultural land, as fixed by the Collector under the 1997 Rules was paid. The Collector called for a report from the Tahsildar, who vide report dated 11.12.2008 noted that the property in question is situated within Nagar Palika Parishad, Jaunpur, was earlier used as a godown by a tractor agency, is adjacent to the Abadi, 3 k.m from the Railway Station and presently the property has a two storey building and is being used for a Eye Clinic and residential purposes.

4. The Collector vide order dated 27.3.2010 held that since the property in question was earlier used for commercial purposes, by a tractor company, and merely because the company had shut down the agency, way back in 1998-1999, would have no bearing regarding the potentiality of the property, accordingly, the property was valued at commercial rate. The area of the property being 9169.46 square metre, of which 185.87 square metre being covered by tinshed, accordingly the land was valued at Rs. 35,28,486.59 @ Rs. 3850/- square metre, the covered area was valued at Rs. 33,45,660/- @ Rs. 60/- per square metre per month being the prescribed rent, accordingly, deficiency of stamp duty of Rs. 5,61,449/- was determined, penalty of Rs. 1000/- and interest @ of Rs. 1.5% per month from the due date was imposed.

5. Aggrieved, petitioner preferred an appeal before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority/Additional Commissioner(Judicial) Varanasi Division, Varanasi being Stamp Appeal No. 43 of 2010. The appellate authority vide order dated 31.3.2011 affirmed the order of the Collector.

6. The orders passed by the appellate authority and the Collector is being assailed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. This Court vide order dated 29.1.2013 remanded the matter to the Collector to examine whether or not commercial building was existing on the site in question on the relevant date and whether it could be called commercial activity at all or not.

The order is extracted:

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by an order passed by the Collector regarding an instrument executed on 6.2.04. The Collector has come to the conclusion that 185.87 square meters of plot was having a building of commercial nature and this fact has not been disclosed in the sale-deed at all by the petitioner.

Learned Standing Counsel states that the tin shed, which has been found in the premises, clearly indicates that commercial building was standing there. Learned counsel for the petitioner strongly refused this factum and states that business of the tractor show room had come to an end in the year 1998-99 and on the date of the execution of the instrument, no commercial activity was carried on, so as to attract provisions of Rule 2(d) of the U.P. Stamp Rules, 1997, which defines commercial building.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the commercial rate, which has been settled by the Collector is arbitrary and excessive, especially in view of t