SEEMA CONSTRUCTION CO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

(2.) The above Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to challenge the validity and legality of the order dated 6th March, 2020 (for short "the impugned order") along with the letter dated 6th March, 2020 (for short "the impugned letter"), both passed/written by respondent No.2 (also referred to as the "Revisional Authority"). The impugned order is passed by respondent No.2 in proceedings initiated under the provision of section 53A of the Maharashtra Stamps Act (for short the "the Stamp Act "), in Revision Case No. 121 of 2014. In addition to the aforesaid challenge, the petitioner also seeks to challenge the validity and legality of the earlier demand notice dated 3rd June, 2014 issued by respondent No.4 against the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed by respondent No.2 without considering the orders and directions issued by this Court vide its order dated 5th December, 2019, passed in Writ Petition No. 3454 of 2018. Respondent No.2 had earlier passed an order dated 10th May, 2018, levying additional stamp duty and penalty on the petitioner. This earlier order (10th May, 2018) was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3454 of 2018. This writ petition came to be allowed and by the order of this Court dated 5th December, 2019, the order passed by respondent No.2 dated 10th May, 2018 was set aside and respondent No.2 was directed to reconsider the matter by granting an effective opportunity to the petitioner of being heard with regard to the correctness of the valuation by the Joint Director, Town Planning (Valuation), Maharashtra State, Pune - Respondent No.3 abovenamed. According to the petitioner, without considering the orders and directions of this Court passed on 5th December, 2019, respondent No.2 passed the impugned order and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.1,29,36,425/- towards short levy of stamp duty along with penalty at 2% per month within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the order. It is the petitioner's contention that respondent No.2 has mechanically passed the impugned order and levied the same stamp duty as was levied earlier vide its order dated 10th May, 2018. It is in these circumstances that the impugned order is challenged in the above writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner claims to be the owner in respect of a plot of land admeasuring 8663.66 square meters or thereabouts and registered in the books of the Collector of Land Revenue under S.No. 40(Pt.), 41, 42 and 43 (Pt.) of Dahisar bearing equivalent C.T.S. Nos. 1055, 1055/1 to 1055.49, and in the Books of Assessor and Collector of Municipal Rates and Taxes under 'R' Ward Nos.7424(1), (2), (3), Survey Nos.444, 445, 447, 448, 449, 450 and 450A of Swami Vivekanand Road, Dahisar (East), of Village Dahisar, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as "said property").