AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (7) TMI 420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... deed presented by the Petitioner for registration. By the said order dated 13-9-83 the ADM had also directed the Tahsildar, Agra, to make a spot inspection and submit a report with regard to the valuation of the building covered by the sale deed. 2. Subsequently during the pendency of this petition the ADM passed another order on 27-4-84 (stated to be ex parte against the Petitioner) imposing additional stamp duty and penalty amounting respectively to Rs. 32,550/- and Rs. 1,62,750/- on the ground that the consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/- set forth in the sale deed was less than the market value of the building in question. By means of an amendment application the Petitioner has brought this order also under challenge. 3. As the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of the Petitioner holding that the complainant could not furnish any solid material in support of his allegation that the consideration shown in the sale deed did not represent the true valuation of the property. He further observed in the order that the monthly rent payable in respect of the building was Rs. 70/- and that the same rent was also shown in the municipal assessment. Consequently the minimum market value of the property forming the subject matter of the sale deed calculated according to Rule 341(iii) of the U.P. Stamp Rules, 1942 worked out to Rs. 21,000/- whereas the amount shown in the sale deed was Rs. 1,50,000/-. With these findings, the ADM directed that the document be sent to the Sub-Registrar for being registered. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntioned above, the Sub-Registrar had made a reference upon the objection of Sri Hardwar Dube through the District Registrar who made the following endorsement upon the order passed by the Sub-Registrar making the reference- Forwarded to Collector, Agra. Sd. Illegible. District Registrar. 28-2-83. 6. The reference is expressly headed as "determination of market value and levy and its utilization under Section 47-A of the Act". It is addressed to the Collector, Agra, through the District Registrar, Agra. Under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act the Collector has been authorised either upon a reference to determine the market value of a property covered by an instrument of conveyance where the market value of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bject of conveyance, exchange, gift, settlement, award or trust, has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may, after registering such instrument, refer the same to the Collector for determination of the market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon. (3) ... ... ... ... (4) ... ... ... ... . 7. We have not the slightest doubt that the market value of the property having been adjudicated and determined by the Collector in the exercise of powers expressly conferred upon him under Section 47-A and in accordance with the procedure laid down therein, the same could not be reopened and reviewed except in accordance with law. The powers exercisable by the Collector under Section 47-A are unarguably....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... These orders passed by the Collector in the exercise of his revisional powers were quasi-judicial, and were final. The Act does not empower the Collector to review an order passed by him under Section 76-A. In the absence of any power of review, the Collector could not subsequently reconsider his previous decisions and hold that there were grounds for annulling or reversing the Mahalkar"s order. The subsequent order dated February 17, 1959 reopening the matter was illegal, ultra vires and without jurisdiction. It is unnecessary to encumber this decision with other authorities as it is now too late in the day to contest the settled legal position that in the absence of a provision for review an authority or even a tribunal for that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to point out any provision whether in the Stamp Act or even in the Registration Act which could disclose the existence of such a power of review upon the Collector. The learned Standing Counsel, however, pointed out Sub-section (4) of Section 47-A as conferring such a power of review upon the Collector. 10. The submission cannot be accepted as Sub-section (4) comes into play only if the matter had not already been referred to the Collector under Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (2) of Section 47-A. In the present case, the dispute had already been specifically referred to and answered by the Collector under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act. 11. The learned Standing Counsel finally made a feeble attempt to urge that the earlier order date....