MUNNA Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned State Counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) Petition has been filed challenging order dtd. 23/12/2006 passed under Sec. 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 indicating deficiency in payment of stamp duty with regard to the sale deed dtd. 10/11/2004. Penalty and interest have also been imposed. Also under challenge is the order dtd. 25/10/2012 passed under Sec. 56 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 rejecting appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the authorities concerned have completely ignored plea raised by petitioner that construction found on the property was infact made subsequent to the date of purchase of the plot and therefore should not have been taken into account for purposes of imposition of stamp duty. It is also submitted that no spot inspection worth the name took place and as such, no actual measurements of the alleged constructions were ever taken due to which also calculation of stamp duty is erroneous.