JUDGMENT Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—The dispute is with regard to payment of stamp duty on the document No. 2077 of 2006 which is a sale-deed dated 10.5.2006 where under agricultural land of Khasara No. 697 area 1.3451 Hectare has been transferred in favour of the petitioner. 2. After the document was registered, Deputy Inspector General (Registration) vide report dated 20.6.2007 referred the matter for determination of its true market value and the deficiency in stamp duty, if any. Pursuant to the above report proceedings under Section 147-A of the Indian Stamp Act were registered as Stamp Case No. 3 of 2007-08. The Collector by order dated 28.7.2008 held the land to be of urban potentiality and determined the market value by applying circle rate notified for the residential purposes. Accordingly, the deficiency in payment of stamp duty was determined and equal amount of penalty was imposed with the further direction to deposit the deficiency with interest @ 1.5% per month. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner has preferred an appeal under Section 56 before the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority, U.P. at Allahabad. The appeal has been dismissed vide order dated 29.2.2009. 4. The petitioner has challenged both the above orders in the present writ petition. 5. Heard Sri J.J.Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nimai Das, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 6. Pleadings of the parties have also been perused. 7. It has been settled by this Court in the case of Anirudh Kumar Singh v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and others, 2000(3) AWC 2587 , that the nature of the agricultural land cannot change until and unless there is a declaration under Section 143 U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act; meaning thereby that the land recorded as agricultural land will continue to be of agriculture nature unless notified otherwise. In the instant case, it is admitted on record that the land was initially recorded as an agricultural land and though an application under Section 143 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R.Act was moved but it had remained pending without issuance of any declaration that the land has ceased to be agricultural in nature. 8. In the instant case, it is admitted on record that the land was initially recorded as an agricultural land and though an application under Section 143 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R.Act was moved but it had remained pending without issuance of any declaration that the land has ceased to be agricultural in nature. 8. In another case in Ram Khilawan v. State of U.P. and others, 2005(98) RD 511, it has been held that the circle rates notified under the Indian Stamp Act are merely guidelines for determining the market value that too till the time of registration of the document and the said rates would not be a conclusive proof of the market value which on registration has to be determined by applying general principles which are applicable in determining the compensation under the Land Acquisition Act. It has also been held that the exemplar sale method is the best method for determining the market value. 9. In this view of the matter as the market value of the land under transfer is required to be determined on the general principles, the nature of the land as to whether it is agriculture or residential looses all significance. 10. The respondents are alleging that the market value on which the sale-deed has been registered is not correct and there is possible evasion of stamp duty, therefore the burden to prove the same lies upon the respondents. There is no evidence on record to prove that the market value as set out in the sale-deed is not adequate or that it cannot be determined correctly on the basis of the recital of the sale-deed. 11. The respondents have not relied upon any exemplar sale-deed. They have simply applied the circle rate notified for the land of residential use in determining the market value. The application of the circle rate of residential use, under the facts and the circumstances, is not legally justified for the reasons that once the document is registered the circle rates only act as a guideline and, secondly, the circle rate of residential land cannot be applied to the agricultural land. 12. In absence of the exemplar sale-deed or any other positive evidence to establish higher market value of the land in dispute than disclosed in the instrument, the impugned orders cannot be sustained under law. 12. In absence of the exemplar sale-deed or any other positive evidence to establish higher market value of the land in dispute than disclosed in the instrument, the impugned orders cannot be sustained under law. Accordingly, the orders dated 29.9.2009 passed by the Chief Controlling Authority, U.P., Allahabad (Annexure 10 to the writ petition) and dated 28.7.2008, passed by the Collector, Kanpur Nagar (Annexure 6 to the writ petition) are quashed and the matter is remanded to the Collector for re-determination of the market value in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of the production of a certified copy of this order. Any amount deposited by the petitioner pursuance to the impugned orders, which has been set aside, be refunded forthwith. 13. Writ petition stands allowed as aforesaid with no orders as to costs. ————