In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court directed the revenue to pay the excess amount paid as stamp duty to the petitioner as the respondents could not produce any material to show that the category of the land in question had been changed as per Section 143 of the UPZA & LR Act.
In this case, on the basis of a spot inspection dated 18.12.2018, the petitioner, Prayag Dant Vigyan Anusandhan, had purchased an agricultural land through a sale deed dated 21.04.2017.
Ready to Grow? Choose a Course That Fits Your Goals!
Later on, on the basis of a spot inspection dated 18.12.2018, proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act were commenced against the petitioner.
An impugned order was passed holding deficiency of stamp duty amounting to Rs. 1,25,750/- and a penalty of Rs. 12,000/-, with interest at 1.5% per month from the date of execution of the sale deed against which an appeal was preferred, which has also been dismissed without taking into account the material available on record.
The counsel representing the petitioner contended that the property was agricultural and has not been classified as abadi land under Section 143 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act). He argued that if a survey identifies the area as agricultural, then the burden will shift to the revenue to prove otherwise.
Ready to Grow? Choose a Course That Fits Your Goals!
The court observed that the property was purchased as agricultural land, and it was also undisputed at the time of survey that Section 143 of the UPZA and LR Act proceedings had not been begun and the land in question had not been proclaimed an abadi land.
The court, after observing relevant judgments, observed that “ it is clear that deficiency of stamp can neither be determined on the value of future use of the property nor it can be levied on the ground that property can fetch good market value nor in the absence of any declaration made by the State Government changing the nature of the land from industrial to commercial.”
The single bench comprising of Piyush Agrawal held that the respondents were unable to produce any evidence of land category change and also directed to refund the petitioner with any amount paid by him in accordance with the impugned order within a month of the certified copy of this order being produced
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
