JUDGMENT : R. SUBRAMANIAN, J. 1. This Appeal is against an Order passed by the First Respondent invoking the suo motu powers under Section 47-A(6) of the Indian Stamp Act. The Order of the Original Authority fixing the valuation was made on 3.10.2007. It is not in dispute that the Appellants had paid the difference Stamp Duty as demanded by the Original Authority in the Order dated 3.10.2007. Thereafter, the First Respondent issued a Notice dated 28.5.2013, purportedly in exercise of suo motu powers under Section47-A(6) of the Indian Stamp Act. It is followed by the Order dated 27.6.2013, which is under challenge in this Appeal. Heard Mrs. S. Jeevitharamani, learned Counsel appearing for Mr. A. Sivaji learned Counsel for the Appellants and Mr. M. Venugopal, learned Special Government Pleader (CS) appearing for the Respondents. 2. Mrs. S. Jeevitharamani, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants would contend that the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has no power to initiate the suo motu proceedings after expiry of five years from the date of the Order of the Original Authority. She would rely upon Section 47-A(6), in support of her contention. As already stated, that the Original Authority has passed an Order on 3.10.2007. So the five years' period expired on 3.10.2012. The First Respondent issued a Notice under Section 47-A(6) on 28.5.2013, which is admittedly beyond the period of five years. In view of the statutory prohibition, the First Respondent had no power to initiate the suo motu proceedings on 28.5.2013. Hence, the Order of the First Respondent/Inspector General of Registration/Chief Revenue Controlling Authority passed in purported exercise of suo motu powers under Section 47-A(6) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, cannot be sustained. The impugned Order dated 27.6.2013 is set aside. The Appeal is allowed with Costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.