Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

27. A Three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in V.N. Devadoss vs. Chief Revenue Control Officer-cum-Inspector and others5 reiterated that procedure under Section 47-A cannot be routinely followed in respect of each and every document of conveyance (1994) 4 S.C.C. 595 (2009) 7 S.C.C. 438 ::12:: MSR,J crp_3373_2016&batch presented for registration without any evidence to show lack of bonafides of the parties to the document by attempting fraudulently to undervalue the subject of conveyance with a view to evade payment of proper stamp duty and thereby cause loss to the Revenue. It observed that the basis for exercise of power under Section 47-A of the Act is willful undervaluation of the subject of the transfer with fraudulent intention to evade payment of proper stamp duty.

40. The 2nd petitioner also did not say that he had any reason to believe that there was deliberate and fraudulent undervaluation of the property with a view to evade payment of proper stamp duty.

41. As held by the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Mohd. Abbas Shafi ( 3 supra), it is not permissible for the Sub-Registrar to refuse to register a document only because the document does not correspond to the valuation as per the Basic Value Register and there must be some more exercise to collect some other materials in addition to the Basic Value Register for him to take the view that the document is not representing the correct valuation. Obviously, there is no such material available with the 1st petitioner. As a routine procedure, it appears that the 1st petitioner had invoked Section 47-A without any evidence to show lack of bona fides of the parties that they have fraudulently undervalued the property with a ::21:: MSR,J crp_3373_2016&batch view to evade stamp duty to cause loss of revenue, which is prohibited as per the decision of the Supreme Court in V.N. Devadoss ( 5 supra).