K. SHIUASHANKAR BHAT, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the endorsement dated 9-9-92 issued by the second respondent refusing the registration of the sale deed presented before him. The sale deed referred to the consideration, as Rs. 1,18,000/ -. According to the petitioner the deed was presented for registration and the second respondent proceeded to register the same, in fact he had put his seal on the document and at this stage for reasons best known to him he refused to complete the process of registration; instead he made the endorsement which states:"i find according to records of the office, the value of the property shown in the document is more than two lakhs. Hence this document is refused to be accepted for registration with request to produce the income tax clearance certificate. " ( 2 ) THE petitioner has attributed ulterior motive to the secondrespondent which has been denied by the second respondent. For the purpose of this writ petition, it is unnecessary for me to consider the same. I think it is open to the petitioner to agitate this matter elsewhere. ( 3 ) THE under-valuation of an instrument produced forregistration is taken care of by Section 45-a of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The said provision states that while registering any instrument if the registering officer has reason to believe that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may refer the same to the deputy commissioner for determination of the market value after registering such an instrument. Section 45-a therefore does not empower the registering officer to decline to register the document on the ground that market value has not been truly disclosed in the deed in question. He should have reason to believe that the property has not been properly valued and on the basis of this reason he should refer the document for proper valuation after registering the document. The deputy commissioner shall have to proceed to determine the market value of the property as provided in the said provision. The power vested in the registering officer to make a reference is not an arbitrary power but a power to be exercised provided he has valid reason to believe that the property has been under-valued. The deputy commissioner shall have to proceed to determine the market value of the property as provided in the said provision. The power vested in the registering officer to make a reference is not an arbitrary power but a power to be exercised provided he has valid reason to believe that the property has been under-valued. The existence of a reason is the foundation for exercising the power under Section 45-a. This aspect shall have to be borne in mind while considering the validity of the action taken by the second respondent in the instant case. ( 4 ) ACCORDING to the second respondent, the records of his officediscloses that the market value of the property shown in the document in question is more than Rs. 2 lakhs and therefore instead of making a reference under Section 45-a after registering the document, he invoked the Provisions of Section 230-a of the income tax Act, 1961. Section 230-a (1) to the extent it is relevant to the instant case reads as follows:"230-A (1 ). Restrictions of registration of transfers of immovable property in certain cases. notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, where any document required to be registered under the Provisions of clause (a) to clause (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908) purports to transfer, assign, limit or extinguish the right, title or interest of any person to or in any property valued at more than two lakh rupees no registering officer appointed under that act shall register any such document, unless the assessing officer certifies that, etc. " (rest omitted) (emphasis supplied) ( 5 ) ACCORDING to the above provision where any documentpurports to transfer etc. , the right of the person in any property valued at more than Rs. 2 lakhs, the registering officer shall not register the document without the certificate contemplated by the said provision. According to Sri ashok haranahalli, learned counsel for the petitioner, the word 'valued' in the above provision refers to the valuation done in the sale deed itself and not to the valuation done by the registering officer. ( 6 ) SECTION 230-a is a provision found in a fiscal legislation. Itshall have to be understood by reference to the language used and not with the supposed intention behind the provision. ( 6 ) SECTION 230-a is a provision found in a fiscal legislation. Itshall have to be understood by reference to the language used and not with the supposed intention behind the provision. If the document purports to transfer any right in any property valued at more than Rs. 2 lakhs, the provision is attracted. The Section does not say that where any document purports to transfer any right in any property 'value of which' is more than Rs. 2 lakhs, then the Section is attracted; instead, it says, that requisite certificate is necessary when the property is valued at more than Rs. 2 lakhs. ( 7 ) THERE is a difference between the meaning conveyed by thephraseology which says that the property valued at and phraseology 'property value of which is'. In the latter case it is the actual value of the property that shall have to be taken into consideration, while in the former it is the valuation that has been done by someone who is concerned with the property or the transaction in question. A plain reading of Section 230-a conveys the idea that if the property purports to transfer any property valuing it at more than Rs. 2 lakhs, the said provision would be attracted. If the valuation is less than Rs. 2 lakhs, the registering authority is not given the power to enquire into the actual value of the property. Section 230-a nowhere provides for an enquiry by the registering authority at all. ( 8 ) LEARNED government pleader relies on a decision of theallahabad High Court in swastic sahkari awas samithi and another v state of a. p. in the said decision the bench held that the sub-registrar before whom the sale deed is presented for registration shall have to value the property sought to be transferred in accordance with the 'circle rates' fixed by the collector concerned and if the valuation is more than Rs. 2 lakhs he should insist on the production of 'no objection certificate' under Section 230-a. ( 9 ) IT is obvious that the aforesaid decision is based on aparticular circular governing the exercise of power by the sub-registrar. There is no such circular, in the instant case, governing the second respondent. 2 lakhs he should insist on the production of 'no objection certificate' under Section 230-a. ( 9 ) IT is obvious that the aforesaid decision is based on aparticular circular governing the exercise of power by the sub-registrar. There is no such circular, in the instant case, governing the second respondent. The Allahabad High Court had no occasion to consider the language of Section 230-a. ( 10 ) IN the circumstances of this case, the second respondenthad no competence to reject the registration of the document only on the ground that the certificate under Section 230-a was not produced. The impugned order shall have to be set aside and it is so set aside. The respondent is directed to proceed according to law and register the document unless there is any other impediment against the registration. ( 11 ) IT was contended that there is an alternative remedyavailable to the petitioner by way of an appeal. Exercise of writ jurisdiction is discretionary. The question raised by the petitioner in the instant case is of general importance and is likely to affect a large number of cases. Hence, I have considered it fit to exercise the writ jurisdiction and dispose of the writ petition on merits. The writ petition is allowed accordingly, no costs. --- *** --- .