MUHAMMAD MUJEEBULLAH SIDDIQUI, J.---Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of notice darted 13-8-2002 and has further sought declaration that the notification No.CIS/BOR/S.W-4/2002-820 is inapplicable to the petitioner and the petitioner is hot liable to pay any 'additional amount towards stamp duty under the impugned notice dated 13-8-2002.
2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that the petitioner a partnership firm engaged in business of building, developing and marketing of land, purchased a piece of land situated in Deh Allah Phiahi, Tapo Songal, through a sale-deed dated 21-2-2002, wherein the location of the land is shown as a Deh Allah Phiahi, Tapo Songal, Karachi (West), now 'Gaddp Town'. The respondent No.3, Deputy Chief Inspector of Stamp/Board of Revenue, Sindh, Karachi, detained the document and issued notice to the petitioner on 13-8-2002, intimating him that the sale- deed was insufficiently stamped and deficit stamp duty was to be recovered. The petitioner was further informed that according to valuation table, the valuation "of the area where the land is situated is, for the purpose of stamp duty at Rs.243 per sq. Yard. Calculated on the basis of this valuation, the total amount of stamp duty comes to Rs.66,45,080. The stamg duty was affixed at Rs.2,19,625 and therefore' the deficiency of Rs.64,25,455 was to be recovered. Through the. Same notice, the petitioner was informed that the Government of Sindh has. Allowed remission at 50% of stamp duty, if it is paid on or before 30-9- 2002. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Collector/ Chief Inspector of Stamps, Board of Revenue, Sindh, Karachi, respondent No.2 on any working day convenient to him. It was further informed that after 3-9-2002, full stamp duty shall be recovered.
3. The representative of the petitioner appeared before the respondent No.2, and took plea that the land, was situated in rural area, and therefore, the stamp duty has been paid in accordance with law and there was no deficiency. However, the contention was not accepted, and therefore, the petitioner filed this petition challenging the illegality of notice dated 13-8-2002.
4. We have heard Mr. Faisal Kamal, learned counsel for the'petitioner and Mr. Ahmed Pirzada, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by S. Anwar Haider, Senior Member Board of Revenue.
5. Mr. Faisal Kamal has reiterated the contention that Deh Allah Phiahi Tapo Songal, where the land sold is situated in rural area, and consequently, the notice is not legal.
6. In order to ascertain, whether Deh Allah Phiahi Tapo Songal, Gadap Town in Rural or Urban Area, the officials of the Board of Revenue were directed to produce the relevant notifications. They have produced Notification No.SO(CO-IV) LG/ UC-II(08/2000 (K) issued under section 3 of the Sindh Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2002, whereby the Government of Sindh declared existing revenue division of Karachi as local area of Karachi City District having 18 Towns, as per local area mentioned in the Schedule appended thereto for the purposes of the said Ordinance. In the Schedule local area of Gadap. Town, .Which is included in City District Government Karachi, is shown. According to schedule the area of existing U.C. Songal is included in the local area of Gadap Town. Another notification dated 21st May, 2001, issued under the same number, as of notification dated 5th May, 2001, after considering all the objections and disposal thereof by the Senior Member of Board of Revenue, under section 3 of the Sindh ' Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000, to delimit the local areas of the 'Union Councils in City District Karachi, has been produced. In this notification also the existing U.C. Songal is shown to be the part of the area of Gadap Town.
7. We called for the report from Chief Secretary, Government of Sindh, as well, who has submitted his report and has pointed out that under section 10 of the Sindh Local Govermnent Ordinance, 2001, the Local Area declared or notified by the Government under the Sindh Local Government Elections Ordinance, 2000 (X of 2000), as Union, Taluka, Town, District or City District shall continue to retain such status and shall be deemed to have been notified as such under Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 2001.
8. Prior to the inclusion of U.C. Songal in Gadap Town, the area was rural, and consequently, a notification under section 27-B of Stamps Act, was issued, which empowers the Chief Inspector of Stamps/Collector to notify the valuation of the lands and buildings situated in rural area. After inclusion of entire U.C. Songal in Gadap Town, and thereby forming part of City District Government Karachi, another notification was issued under section 27-A of the Stamp Act, 1899, on 30-1-2002 in respect of Urban Properties located within the entire Province of Sindh. In the schedule annexed with the notification U.C. Songal where the land under consideration is situated is not specifically shown in any category. However, in note appended to the notification, there is a provision, that a property which does not appear to fall in any of the categories shown in the said. Annexure shall be deemed to fall in the adjacent lowest category of the annexure.
9. For ascertaining the lowest category shown in the annexure adjacent to UC Songal, the learned Senior Member Board of Revenue was directed to furnish Map of the area. Today, the Map has been produced. A perusal whereof shows that the area Comprising Surjani Housing Scheme is nearest to Deh Allah Phiahi Tapo Songal, where the land under consideration is situated. Surjani Housing Scheme is in the lowest category No.6, and the minimum values shown for the said area is Rs.243 per sq. Yard.
10. On the basis of above material, the learned Additional Advocate-General Sindh, has submitted that the Deh Allah Phiahi Tapo Songal being the part UC Songal. Has been included in Gadap Town, which is a part of Karachi City District Government, and thus, the area where the land under consideration is situated is Urban area which shall be governed for the purpose of stamp duty under Notification No.IGS/ BOR/2002-100 dated 30-1-20D2, under section 27-A of the Stamp Act, 1899, in pursuance whereof the impugned notice has been issued.
11. Mr. Faisal Kamal, learned.Counsel for the petitioner after -perusal of the documents referred to above persisted with his contention that Deh Allah Phiahi Tapo Songal, was a rural area on 21-2- 2002, when the sale-deed in favour of the petitioner was - executed and according o him it is to be governed under Notification No.IGS (BOR/RS&EP/2000-1455 dated 14th December, 2000, issued under section 27-B of Stamp Act, 1899, in respect of the rural areas.
12. We have carefully considered the contentions raised by the learned Advocates for the parties and the entire material placed on record. The contention of Mr. Faisal Kamal, that the sale transaction under consideration is to be governed under notification 14-12-2000, issued under section 27-B of Stamp Act 1899, is not tenable for the reason that prior to inclusion of UC Songal in Gadap Town in May 2001, this notification was applicable to UC Songal, but after issuance of notifications referred to above on 5th and 21st May, 2001, the status.Of UC Songal was changed and it was converted from Rural area to Urban area, whereafter the notification issued on 30-1-2002, became applicable. The date of transaction in respect of land under consideration is 21-2-2002 and therefore, the impugned notice is in accordance with the law as prevailing on 21-2-2002 The impugned note is accordance with the law and consequently, the petition is without substance, which stands dismissed.
13. Before parting with this order, we would like to record the request of Mr. Faisal Kamal, that the concession of 50% which was available to the petitioner, if duty was paid before 3-9-2002 may be extended to the petitioner. This petition was filed on 4-11-2002 much after expiry of cut-off date and therefore, this Court cannot issue any direction which pertains to the policy decision. However, Senior Member Board of Revenue, who is present is Court has stated that if any application in this behalf is submitted, that shall be considered on merits and the competent authority shall taken reasonable view and if possible shall try to accommodate the petitioner. We would like to clarify that it should not be taken as any undertaking or promise on the part of learned Senior Member, Board of Revenue and this statement is confined to the effect the request shall be considered and if possible the remission shall be allowed.