Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2019 (RAJ)

Kalpataru Minerals v. State of Rajasthan

2011-09-19

ARUN MISHRA, KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI

body2011
Hon'ble MISHRA, CJ.—Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This intra Court appeal is preferred as against the order dated 16.5.2007 passed by the Single Bench in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2206/2007 dismissing the writ application of the appellant. 3. The dispute arose with regard to payment of stamp duty on lease documents. The Collector determined the stamp duty which was payable alongwith the penalty. Against the said order, the appellant preferred a revision before the Rajasthan Tax Board. Under the provisions of Section 65(1) of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998, it was necessary for the appellant to make the dismissed the revision. Aggrieved by the order of the Rajasthan Tax Board, writ application was preferred by the appellant, which was dismissed by the Single Bench. Aggrieved by the order of the Single Bench, this intra Court appeal has been preferred. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant has tried to take us to the merits of the order passed by the Collector submitting that the order passed by the Collector. The learned counsel submitted that the Rajasthan Tax Board has also erred in dismissing the writ petition. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents Mr. K.K. Bissa supported the impugned order and submitted that the order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board comes in the way of the appellant to question the merits of the order of the Collector as the revision against the said order has been dismissed for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 65(1) of the Act, hence no case for interference is made out. 6. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion, that no case is made out so as to interfere on merits in the order of the Collector, revision against which has been dismissed by the Rajasthan Tax Board for non-compliance of the provisions of Section 65(1) of the Rajasthan Stamp Act. Section 65(1) of the Rajasthan Stamp Act imposes upon a person preferring revision to deposit 50% of the appellant, therefore, we cannot look into the order of the Collector in view of the order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board. The remedy of revision had already been availed by the appellant. The decision has not been rendered on merits by the Board. The order interdicts to look into merits of the case. 7. The remedy of revision had already been availed by the appellant. The decision has not been rendered on merits by the Board. The order interdicts to look into merits of the case. 7. At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant prayed for time to deposit 50% amount before the Rajasthan Tax Board with the prayer that the Rajasthan Tax Board may be directed to hear the revision on merits. 8. The learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Single Bench is modified. Six weeks time is granted to the appellant to deposit 50% of the recoverable amount before the Rajasthan Tax Board. In case the amount is deposited within the stipulated time, the revision shall be heard and decided in accordance with law. The intra Court appeal is accordingly disposed of.