BALAJI ESTATE AGENCY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) This Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India calls in question the legality, propriety and correctness of an order dtd. 22/7/2020 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune, in Appeal No.44 of 2018 under Sec. 53 (1-A) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, whereby the Appeal preferred by the Petitioners came to be dismissed by affirming the order dtd. 3/1/2018 passed by the Collector of Stamps, Pune Rural, under Sec. 32A(4) of the Act determining the deficit stamp duty of Rs.67,750.00 and penalty of Rs.1,46,340.00 thereon.

(3.) The Petitioner No.1 is a partnership firm. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are its partners. Under the Sale Deed dtd. 8/3/2011, Vandana Prakash Pawar and Rahul Suresh Pawar had purchased a land admesuring 1H 34R out of Survey No.692/1 situated at Mauje Dhoksanghavi from the then holders thereof and to which the Petitioners were the consenting parties as the development agreement in respect of the said land was executed by the then holders in favour of the Petitioners. By a registered Power of Attorney executed on 27/6/2011 the purchasers professed to constitute Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 herein - original developer / consenting parties, as their attorneys conferring thereby diverse powers. A stamp duty of Rs.500.00 only was paid on the said instrument. A notice came to be issued to the Petitioners on 7/4/2015 by the Sub-Registrar of Assurances contending that deficit stamp duty and registration fees were paid on the aforesaid instrument of Power of Attorney. The Petitioners were called upon to deposit a sum of Rs.90,400.00 within 30 days. The Petitioners gave reply to the said notice contending, inter alia, that the stamp duty was leviable under Article 48 (f ) (ii) (a) of Schedule I, as the power of attorney was given to the close relatives.