Smt. Shashi Gulati vs Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 316 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 316 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 April, 2022

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Shashi Gulati vs Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal ... on 1 April, 2022

Bench: Pankaj Bhatia




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 19
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1006401 of 2007
 
Petitioner :- Smt. Shashi Gulati
 
Respondent :- Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal And 2 Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- B.L.Mishra
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.

The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.11.1997 passed by the opposite party no.2 whereby deficiency of stamp duty was assessed against the petitioner amounting to Rs.59687.50 as well as penalty of Rs.312.50, total amount of Rs.60,000/- was directed to be paid by the petitioner, the order dated 27.02.1998 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recall of the order dated 13.11.1997 was rejected and the order dated 18.10.2007 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed.

The Counsel for the petitioner argues that the dispute arose on account of a sale deed of agricultural land purchased by the petitioner. He argues that by means of ex-parte order dated 13.11.1997 stamp duty was assessed only on the ground that near the land in question, industrial activity was being carried out and thus minimum of stamp duty treating the land to be agricultural land was not acceptable.

The Counsel for the petitioner further argues that two sale deeds were executed in favour of the petitioner. In respect of the second sale deed situate at the same place bearing Gata No.1601, a similar order was passed which traveled up to this Court and this Court vide judgment and order dated 07.07.2010 decided the issue in favour of the petitioner mainly on the ground that the nature of the land was agricultural and the same was never converted under Section 143 of the UPZA & LR Act.

As the submissions of the petitioner are similar in the present writ petition also, I have no reason to differ with the judgment and reasoning of this Court passed in Writ Petition No.3242 (MS) of 2010 (Smt. Shashi Gulati vs State of U.P. and others). Thus, following the said judgment, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders 13.11.1997, 27.02.1998 and 18.10.2007 are set aside.

Order Date :- 1.4.2022

akverma