The last issue which we must take notice of is the levy of penalty. While it is true that sub section (4) of section 47-A empowers the Collector to impose penalty not exceeding four time the proper stamp duty, the same stands attracted in a case where it is found that the market value of the property was not truly set forth. There must therefore necessarily be an intention to evade payment of duty, which entails the levy of penalty. Secondly the words "not exceeding..." confer on the Collector a discretion to levy penalty dependent upon the facts of each individual case. The mere prescription of a maximum does not necessarily mean that in each case a penalty equivalent to four times the proper duty is liable to be paid. In any view of the matter, the imposition of penalty has serious civil consequences and therefore must be preceded by due application of mind and a consideration of all relevant factors including whether there was an intention to evade payment of duty. We find that the Collector has failed to advert to this aspect also while passing the impugned orders.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
The Chief Justice's Court
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 598 of 2015
Smt. Vijaya Jain V State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Hon'ble Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud,Chief Justice
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Citation:AIR 2016 (NOC)449 ALL
Order Date :- 1.9.2015
