Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Writ petition is directed against the order of the Collector, Jalaun, dated 30.5.11 and the appellate order dated 23.9.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi.
By the said orders, the authorities have held that the petitioner is liable to pay deficient stamp duty determined and that there is deficiency in payment of stamp duty.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that liability to pay the stamp duty was taken over by the seller and, therefore, it cannot be fastened upon the petitioner. Secondly, the land in question is an agricultural land and its market value cannot be assessed by treating it to be an abadi.
In view of Section 29 of the Indian Stamps Act, 1898, liability to pay the stamp duty is upon the purchaser unless a contrary intention is expressed between the parties under any agreement. In the present case, the seller has agreed to bear the expenses of the sale-deed, but there is no condition that the stamp duty payable on the sale-deed would also be borne by him. It is in the above circumstances that the authorities below held that the condition that the seller would bear the expenses of the sale-deed would not shift the burden of payment of stamp duty also upon him. There is no condition in the agreement that the stamp duty shall be payable by the seller/vendor.
In view of the above, I do not find any error in the finding returned by the authorities below in this regard. The first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly fails.
By the sale-deed in question dated 13.11.09, the land of plot no. 284/1 and 284/3 has been transferred. The said land is recorded as an agricultural land, except for a very small portion of one of the plots which is recorded as an abadi. The authorities only on account of the fact that the said land has been included within the municipal limits and on a part of it exists some construction, assesssed the market value by applying the residential rate, as suggested in the inspection report. The authorities have not applied their mind as to exactly what was the rate of the land prevailing in the locality at the relevant time in assessing the market value. There is no material to show the rate on the basis of which the market value has been assessed and the deficiency in stamp duty has been calculated. The two orders are completely silent in this regard.
In view of the above, the orders impugned are completely uninformed of the reasons so far the assessment of market value and the determination of stamp duty are concerned.
Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 30.5.2011 and 23.9.11 are quashed in so far as they determine the quantum of the deficient stamp duty and the matter is remanded to the Collector-respondent for re-determination of the deficient stamp duty.
Any amount deposited by the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned orders, or under the interim orders of this Court, shall abide by the final decision, which may be taken by the Collector in response to this order.
The writ petition is allowed in part as above.
Order Date :- 3.5.2012 sks-grade iv