Court No. - 44
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 58691 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Awadh Kumari Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manu Khare Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondents.
The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 16.8.2010, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Administration) Chitrakoot Dham Mandal, Banda, respondent no. 4 in Appeal No. 45/21 of 2009-10 under section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') and the order dated 15.4.2010, passed by the Additional District Magistrate, (Finance & Revenue), Banda, respondent no. 6 in Case No. 18/231 of 2009-10 under section 47-A(3) of the Indian Stamp Act.
The counsel for the petitioner has argued that the sale deed in question was executed on 01.07.2006, on which, the stamp duty was paid. On the basis of some ex-parte report, an order dated 25.10.2008, being an ex-parte order, came to be passed imposing penalty as well as directions for deposit of the deficient stamp duty with interest. As the said order was an ex-parte order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was allowed on 10.12.2009, and the matter was remanded for decision afresh.
Thereafter, a fresh show cause notice was issued on 23.12.2009 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why an order for deficient court fees, registration fees and the penalty may not be imposed against the petitioner. In response to the said notice dated 23.12.2009, the petitioner moved an application on 12.1.2010, offering to pay the deficient stamp duty, it was pleaded that the petitioner is an old lady and she was never informed of the earlier order, however, she was ready and willing to pay the deficient stamp duty and the registration fees, she also prayed that she may be exonerated from levy of proposed penalty.
The Additional District Magistrate, (Finance and Revenue), Banda passed an order dated 15.4.2010 holding that on account of the village in question Gram Lohra, being declared as a special Village a higher stamp duty was payable, he thus came to a conclusion that the stamp paid was deficient by Rs. 8459/- and the registration amount of Rs. 300/- was also paid in deficit. He further proceeded to levy a penalty of Rs. 8459/-. He directed that besides the penalty the deficient amount of the stamp duty assessed at Rs. 8459/- be paid along with interest with effect from 1.7.2006 at the rate of Rs. 1.50% per month.
The petitioner challenged the said order in appeal, however, the appeal stood dismissed vide order dated 16.8.2010. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing the present writ petition.
Sri Manu Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner, has argued that no grounds for levying of penalty existed, thus, the order of penalty is without any basis. He further argues that on the first date, i.e. in the year 2010, the petitioner had herself offered to pay the deficient stamp duty, as such, the authorities ought to have accepted the said request and dropped the proceedings. He has relied upon the judgement of this Court in the case of Jayanti Nagar Sahkari Avas Samiti, Lucknow vs. State of U.P. and others, 2006 All. C.J. 1778 and Mohd. Haneef and others vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and others, 2008 (11) ADJ 101 wherein it has been held that for levy of penalty it is essential that a finding with regard to contumacious conduct should be recorded and there should be a finding that non-payment was on account of deliberate act.
In the present case, in both the orders, there is no finding returned that there was any deliberate attempt/omission by the petitioner in not payment of the stamp duty. Thus, the levy of penalty is wholly unjustified and is, accordingly, quashed.
The petitioner is directed to pay the deficient stamp duty of Rs. 8459/- along with interest as provided under Section 47-A (4A) of the Act from 1.7.2006 (date of execution of the sale deed) upto 15.4.2010, the date when the first order was passed. The petitioner shall also pay the deficient registration fee of Rs. 300/-. The said payments are to be made by the petitioner within three months from today.
The writ petition is disposed off in terms of the said direction.
It is clarified that in the event payments are not made within the time granted, the petitioner shall be required to pay the whole amount with interest as provided under the statute. The amount, already deposited, if any, shall be adjusted towards the final deposit to be made in terms of the order passed above.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Puspendra