BLUECRAFT AGRO PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-

(2.) The petitioner-company claims that it was to get scribed a sale deed in order to purchase of 54 Bighas and 7 Biswas of land along with the constructed area situated at village Mamida, District Yamuna Nagar. For that purpose, the petitioner-company is alleged to have purchased Non-Judicial E-Stamp papers worth Rs. 7,30,73,460.00 from the Government Treasury on 26/2/2018. In paragraph 5 of the writ petition, it has pleaded as under:-

(3.) The petitioner further claims that it applied on 1/3/2018 for refund of the excess stamp duty deposited i.e. Rs. 1,78,33,594.00 to the Sub-Registrar, Jagadhri. However, the application was returned with an endorsement to take up the matter with the Collector, Yamuna Nagar. Thereafter, the petitioner claims that it submitted an application to the Collector on 27/3/2018 for refund of the alleged excess stamp duty. Thereafter, it purchased a fresh set of E-Stamp papers of Rs. 5,46,81,000/-and two sale deeds were got scribed and registered. The petitioner is statedto have applied for refund of the stamp duty of Rs. 7,30,73,460.00 under Sec. 50 and 52 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 which is stated to have been dismissed by the Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Jagadhri, on 11/6/2019 on the ground that the application was filed beyond the time prescribed. The petitioner claims that on 1/3/2018 it had immediately applied for refund to the Sub-registrar, Jagadhri and therefore the order passed is wrong.