PEEYUSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 8.9.2003 passed by the Additional Collector, Finance & Revenue, Ghaziabad and the appellate order thereto dated 25.10.2005 passed by the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut in proceeding under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

(2.) By the aforesaid orders the authorities have determined the deficiency in stamp duty in connection with the sale dated 19.11.1999 by treating property to be of commercial nature though according to the petitioner it is purely residential property.

(3.) In assailing the aforesaid orders the primary contention of Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner is that no notice was served upon the petitioner as contemplated by Rule-9 of the U.P. Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 and as such the order of the Additional Collector is ex parte. The appellate authority in dealing with above aspect as to whether the order passed by the Additional Collector was in violation of the principle of natural justice has side tracked the issue and has concluded by merely saying that the notice sent to the petitioner is deemed to be served by refusal.