1996 (7) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a, P. K. Jain For the Respondent : A. K. Srivastava JUDGMENT Madan Mohan Punchhi, J. A learned Single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad dismissed the writ petition of the appellant, leaving the orders dated September 13, 1994 passed by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Board of Revenue, U.P. uninterferred with. On May 12, 1992, the appellant, for a sum of Rs. 70,000/- purchase....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t stamp duty to the extent of Rs. 57,852.50 paise had been evaded, which he ordered the appellant to pay, as well as to suffer payment of penalty to pay, as well as to suffer payment of penalty to the extent of Rs. 12,147.50 paise. On challenging this order in revision before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority the first respondent, the market value of the house was reduced to Rs. 2.5 lacs and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the instant case and nothing further was required to be done. Rule 351 of the U.P. Stamp Rule 1942 providing for determination of the minimum market value, also subserving the purpose of Section 47-A of the Act was explained to say that the minimum market value determinable was not the end of the matter and value could be determined at a figure higher than that if warranted. We have carefull....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Stamps, for one does not know how, determined the monthly rental value of the property at Rs. 1500/- per mensem and worked out the price of the house on that basis. Despite that the Tehsildar at a subsequent stage reported that the annual rental value of the house was Rs. 1200/- per annum, whereas for house tax purpose it was recorded as Rs. 840/- per annum. the first respondent ignoring the sam....