INDERJEET SINGH Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter alia praying for setting aside an order dated 30.11.2010 passed by the respondent no. 3, whereby the stamp duty and penalty payable by the petitioner with respect of deeds for sale of the property bearing no. J -129 Rajouri Garden, New Delhi was assessed at Rs. 38,90,000/ - and after adjusting the stamp duty already paid, the petitioner was called upon to pay a sum of Rs. 33,38,000/ -. The petitioner has also assailed an order dated 28.10.2011 passed by respondent no. 2 rejecting the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the above mentioned order dated 30.11.2010. The said orders dated 28.10.2011 and 30.11.2010 are separately referred to as 'impugned order', and collectively referred to as 'impugned orders'.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the relevant facts are as under: -

(3.) IT was further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the deed in question was only with respect to one half undivided share of the said property. The other half of the undivided share of the property had already been purchased by the petitioner earlier and the sale deed with respect to the same was already registered and returned to the petitioner. The said transaction was not the subject matter of registration before the Sub - registrar. Nonetheless, respondent no.3 has assessed the duty payable on the entire property by accepting the consideration of Rs. 5,75,00,000/ - as reflected in a photocopy of the alleged Agreement to Sell which was allegedly sent by Amritpal Singh. It was contended that the Sub -registrar or respondent no. 3 were functus officio in respect of the earlier conveyance deed that had already been registered and respondent no. 3 did not have the jurisdiction to assess any stamp duty in respect of any instrument that was not before him