Judgment :- 1. Mr. K. Balasubramanian, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice. Heard both. 2. The writ petition is directed against the show cause notice issued by the respondent, being the Appellate Authority, while performing his functions under Section 47-A(5) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Under the impugned show cause notice, the Appellate Authority sought to refix the value of the property for the purpose of stamp duty at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per cent and it is with that proposal, he has sent the impugned show cause notice directing the petitioner to submit her explanation. 3. The impugned show cause notice is challenged mainly on the ground that under Section 47-A(5) of the said Act, when the petitioner has filed an appeal against the order of the Collector of Stamps, the Appellate Authority has no right to refix the value. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also rely upon a decision of this Court in the case of Asmathullah Khan Vs The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority cum Inspector General of Registration (reported in 2010 (6) CTC 567 ) to contend that the Appellate Authority cannot refix the valuation and in such event, the matter has to be remitted back to the Collector of Stamps. 4. Ona perusal of the said judgement, it is clear that it deals with the case where there is a difference between the market value and guideline value and it is in those circumstances, a reliance has been placed on the judgment in the case of R.Sai Bharathi Vs. J.Jayalalitha (reported in 2003 (4) CTC 577 (SC)). In my considered opinion, this Court has not considered about the powers of the Appellate Authority in revising the value. J.Jayalalitha (reported in 2003 (4) CTC 577 (SC)). In my considered opinion, this Court has not considered about the powers of the Appellate Authority in revising the value. Even otherwise, under Section 47-A(6) of the said Act, which is as follows : "The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority may, suo motu, call for and examine an order passed under sub section (2) or sub section (3) and if such order is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, he may make such injury or cause such injury to be made and, subject to the provisions of the Act, may initiate proceedings to revise, modify or set aside such order and may pass such order thereon as he thinks fit." the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, who is the Appellate Authority, even under his suo motu power, has a right to revise or modify or set aside the order of the Collector of Stamps, which includes modification of the valuation also. 5. Be that as it may, now that what is impugned is only a show cause notice issued by the respondent proposing to increase the value, it is open to the petitioner to make his objection including the objections raised by the petitioner in this writ petition to the effect that the respondent has no jurisdiction to refix the value and in the event of such decision, the matter may be referred back to the Collector of Stamps. 6. In such view of the matter, giving liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed objection to the impugned show cause notice dated 2.12.2010 including the objections, which are stated above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the above MP is also dismissed. The petitioner shall submit her objections within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such objections are filed, the respondent shall consider the matter on merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter.