In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 Date of decision: May 28, 2009 Amar Singh and others .. Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and another .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. J.V. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Praduman Yadav, DAG, Haryana. A.N. Jindal, J This revision petition is against the order dated 26.4.2004, passed by the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), exercising the powers of Collector, Rewari, whereby he assessed the value of the property in question to the tune of Rs.6,46,550/- and imposed the stamp duty to the tune of Rs.69,285/- from the purchaser-petitioners (herein referred as 'the petitioners') The petitioners had purchased the property vide sale deed No.6515 dated 24.3.1998 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, whereas the seller had purchased this very plot on 19.5.1997 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. However, Sale Registrar detected on 19.3.1999 that the value of the property was far higher then for which it was registered, as such, he forwarded the document to the Collector, Rewari for taking action under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act, 1899 (herein referred as 'the Act'). The Collector vide order dated 26.4.2004, assessed the property at the value of Rs.6,46,550/- and imposed the stamp duty of Rs.69,285/-. The main contention of the petitioner is that since the sale deed was not impounded on the day when it was registered, and proceedings Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 -2- *** were initiated after one year i.e. 19.3.1999 which is in clear violation of Section 47-A of the Act. Heard. Before enacting Section 47-A in the Act, there was no provision therein empowering the revenue authorities to make enquiry of the value of the property, conveyed for determining the duty chargeable. Thus, this provision has been added to deal with those cases where private party by arranging clandestinely undervalued property with a view to deprive Government of legitimate revenue by way of stamp duty. Each of the States made this amendment for highjacking the valuation of stamp duty in their respective States. Similarly, State of Haryana, by way of Haryana Act XXXVII of 1973, directed to insert Section 47-A w.e.f. 1st day of November, 1966. The Act was published in the Haryana Gazette dated 24th September, 1973. The amended provisions of Section 47-A reads as under :- “S. 47-A Instruments under-valued, how to be dealt with – (1) If the Registering Officer appointed under the Registration Act, 1908, while registering any instrument transferring any property, has reason to believe that the value of the property or the consideration, as the case may be, has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may after registering such instrument, refer the same to the Collector for determination of the value or consideration, as the case may be, and the proper duty payable thereon. (2) On receipt of reference under sub-section (1), the Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 -3- *** Collector shall, after giving the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after holding an enquiry in such manner as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act, determine the value or consideration and the duty as aforesaid and the deficient amount of duty, if any, shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty. (3) The collector may suo motu, or on receipt of reference from the Inspector General of Registration or the Registrar of a district, in whose jurisdiction the property or any portion thereof which is the subject-matter of the instrument is situate, appointed under the Registration Act, 1908, shall, within three years from the date of registration of any instrument, not already referred to him under sub-section (1), call for and examine the instrument for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the correctness of its value or consideration, as the case may be, and the duty payable thereon and if after such examination, he has reason to believe that the value or consideration has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may determine the value or consideration and the duty as aforesaid in accordance with the procedure provided for in sub-section (2); and the deficient amount of duty, if any, shall be payable by the person liable to pay the duty: Provided that the Collector shall, within a period of two years from the date of commencement of the Indian Stamp (Haryana Amendment) Act, 1973, also be competent to act as Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 -4- *** aforesaid in respect of the instruments registered on or after the first day of November, 1966 and before the first day of October, 1970. (4) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Collector under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) may, within thirty days from the date of the order, prefer an appeal before the District Judge and all such appeals shall be heard and disposed of in such a manner as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act. From the bare reading of the aforesaid provisions, it transpires that in the following circumstances, the stamp duty on under valued registered document could be checked and determined : 1. When the Registrar at the time of registering the documents has reason to believe that document has been under valued then he will impound the document and forward the sale to the Collector who will determine the value and the procedure with regard to determination of the duty governed by sub-section (2) of the said Section . 2. The Collector was also empowered to suo motu take cognizance of the issue when he has reasons to believe that document is under valued. 3. The enquiry could further be initiated on a reference from Inspector General of Registration or Registrar of a district in whose jurisdiction the property or any part thereof is the subject-matter of the instrument is situated. Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 -5- *** The procedure to determine the value has been set forth as under :- (i)The Collector shall call for and examine the instrument and make a subjective satisfaction as to the correctness of the value or consideration, as the case may be; (ii)If on examination of the document, he has reasons to believe that the consideration as mentioned in the sale contract has not been duly set forth, then he would determine the value or consideration and the duty as aforesaid, by holding enquiry into the matter and providing opportunity to the parties of being heard. Now coming to the instant case, it may be observed that here the Sub Registrar on suspicion referred the sale deed after more than a year of its registration. The section does not refer to any of such powers of the Sub Registrar for dealing with the under valued document. There is no audit report by the Controller or Inspector General of Registration or Registrar of a district, as such, the Sub Registrar has no such powers for referring the matter in the manner he did. The document having been registered on 24.3.1998 was forwarded on 19.3.1999 without recording any ground on the basis of which he found the document to be under valued. Even otherwise, after registering the document Sub Registrar becomes functus officio and cannot refer the matter late on. In the similar circumstances, this court in case Abhinav Kumar vs. State of Haryana, 2001 (1) RCR (Civil) 91 observed that the document should have been impounded while registering the same and there is no provisions under the Civil Revision No. 5164 of 2005 -6- *** Act whereby deficiency could be recovered from the vendee subsequent to the registration of the document. It would further be significant to mention that the circumstances under which the case was referred and enquiry held, is in violation of Section 47-A of the Act. As such the order cannot be sustained. In view of what has been discussed above, the petition is accepted and the impugned order as well as the order passed by the Collector are set aside. May 28, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge