CWP No.6095 of 2009 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6095 of 2009 Date of decision: April 23, 2009. Satish Kumar & Anr. ...Petitioner(s) v. Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Rajender Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): Notice of motion. Shri Ravi Dutt Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Having regard to the nature of the order I propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter affidavit from the respondents, more so when the challenge lies to the quasi judicial orders. The petitioners are aggrieved at the order dated 15.10.2008 (Annexure P-9) passed by the 1st respondent whereby an appeal preferred by respondent No.3 against the order dated 1.10.2007 (Annexure P-6) of the Collector, Panchkula has been allowed and the petitioners have been CWP No.6095 of 2009 -: 2 :- directed to make good the deficiency in stamp duty to the extent of Rs.2,26,068/-. Shorn of the details, suffice to mention here that the petitioners purchased built-up industrial shed No.245, Phase II, Industrial Area, Urban Estate, Panchkula measuring 600.66 sq. meters along with covered area of 324.03 sq. meters vide registered sale deed dated 14.3.2001 for an ostensible sale consideration of Rs.7,00,000/-. They affixed stamp duty valuing Rs.1,08,500/-. A reference was made by the Sub-Registrar, Panchkula alleging evasion of the stamp duty by the petitioners. A show cause notice was accordingly served upon them, inter-alia, alleging that at the time of execution of the sale deed, the market value of the plot was Rs.1850/- per sq. meter, besides Rs.300/- per sq. meter for the constructed area. In this manner, according to the Collector, the market value of the property at the time of execution of the sale deed was Rs.22,58,500/- and the petitioners were liable to pay stamp duty to the tune of Rs.3,34,568/-. Since they had already affixed stamp duty of Rs.1,08,500/-, the show cause notice pointed out the deficiency of Rs.2,26,068/-. The petitioners contested the show cause notice. The Collector, Panchkula vide his order dated 1.10.2007 substantially accepted the petitioners' objections and found that the stamp duty was deficient to the tune of Rs.46,500/- only. The petitioners deposited the said amount. The Sub Registrar, Panchkula, however, felt aggrieved and preferred an appeal which has been allowed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division vide his impugned order dated 15.10.2008. I have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders. CWP No.6095 of 2009 -: 3 :- In my considered view, both the orders, i.e., the one passed by the Collector, Panchkula as well as the order passed by the Appellate Authority suffer from one or the other legal infirmities. The order dated 1.10.2007 passed by the Collector, Panchkula does not assign any reason, much less a valid reason, as to on what basis the deficiency towards stamp duty has been reduced from Rs.2,26,068 to Rs.46,500/-. The Collector miserably failed to perform his statutory duty under Section 47-A(2) of the Indian Stamp duty which obligates him to determine the market value of the property on the relevant date and then only to hold as to whether or not there is a deficiency in stamp duty. Unfortunately, the appellate authority has also not dealt with the issue in accordance with the mandate of Section 47-A of the Act. The appellate authority's order merely recites what has been mentioned in the show cause notice served upon the petitioners. The appellate order sans reasons in support of its conclusion that the market value of the property at the time of registration of the sale deed was actually Rs.22,58,500/-. For the reasons afore-stated, both the orders, namely, dated 1.10.2007 of the Collector, Panchkula and dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector, Panchkula for afresh decision in accordance with law and within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Dasti. April 23, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge