- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 31712 OF 2019 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: M/S EMBASSY PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED (A COMPANY INCORPORATE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956) HAVING ITS OFFICE AT FIRST FLOOR, EMBASSY POINT, 150, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP BY ITS DIRECTOR. MR. NARPAT SINGH CHORARIA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V. SRINIVAS RAGHAVAN LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SANJAY NAIR.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REGISTRATION) AND DISTRICT REGISTRAR, OFFICE AT 70/16, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VYALIKAVAL, KODANDARAMPURA, MALLESHWARAM WEST, BENGALURU 560003. ALSO AT NO. 17, MARUTHI PLAZA, 2ND MAIN ROAD, VYALIKAVAL EXTENTION, BENGALURU - 560 003. Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 2. THE SUB REGISTRAR OF INDIA OFFICE AT NH-7, BELLARY ROAD, OPPOSITE TO POLICE STATION, CHIKKAJALA, BENGALURUL NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 157. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA ., AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09.11.2017 ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY R-1 IN CASE NO.46- A/JALA/33/2016-17, DOCUMENT NO. SALE AGREEMENT- 2640/2010-11, SALE 3434/2011-12 AND CASE NO.46- A.JALA/34/2016-17, DOCUMENT NO. SALE AGREEMENT- 2640/2010-11, SALE 640/2012-13 AND CASE NO.46- A.JALA/35/2016-17, DOCUMENT NO.SALE AGREEMENT- 2640/2010-11, SALE 3002/2011-12 AND ORDER DATED 04.04.2019 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE AUTHORITY, BANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE-B IN (REVENUE) APPEAL NO.124 OF 2018 AND CONSEQUENT NOTICE FOR RECOVERY DATED 20.06.2019 UNDER REFERENCE NO.46/JALA/33/2016-17 ISSUED BY R-1 AS PER ANNEXURE-C THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner is before the Court being aggrieved by the Order dated 09.11.2017 passed by respondent No.1 at Annexure-A and the Order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Authority as per Annexure-B as well as the consequent notice dated 20.06.2019 issued by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-C in terms of which the respondent-Authorities have found that in a sale transaction of immovable property measuring 51 acres 31 guntas situated in Hosahali Village, which had been entered into between petitioner and M/s. Sammys Dreamland Company Pvt. Ltd., there is a suppression of actual value of the sale transaction. In that though total sale consideration as per the agreement dated 10.05.2012 is shown at Rs.265,00,00,000/- in the deeds of sale, it is shown as settled at Rs.257,00,00,000/-. That in the agreement of sale there was a mention of petitioner having parted with a post dated cheque for Rs.165,00,00,000/- which transaction is not reflected in the deeds of sale resulting in suppression of the actual value of sale consideration. It is this, based on which - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 the respondent-authorities have passed the impugned orders and consequent notices. 2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri. V. Srinivas Raghavan, appearing for Sri. Sanjay Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner taking this Court through the records, more particularly a letter dated 19.07.2019 issued by HDFC Bank addressed to the petitioner herein, submits that though the agreement in question indeed reflected issuance of a post dated cheques for Rs.165,00,00,000/-, the said cheque was never encashed. He submits that the value of actual transaction that had taken place has been truly and duly reflected in the deeds of sale. Since the respondent-authorities are calling upon the petitioner to pay the stamp duty on the amount which was never paid by the petitioner, the order is arbitrary and illegal. 3. In response, learned AGA drawing attention of this Court to internal page No.8 of the impugned order submits that the suppression of payment of Rs.165,00,00,000/- has been found during audit of the documents in terms of the provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act. That since the petitioner had not given any justifiable reasons, the impugned orders have been - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 passed and no irregularity or illegality can be recovered thereof. 4. Heard and perused the records. 5. Paragraph Nos.11 and 14 of the impugned order reads as under: 11. ಅಂದೆ ರೂ.1682723500/-ಗಳನು ಧ ೆಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಾವರುವದು ಕಂಡುಬರುತೆ. ಆದೆ ಈ !ಂೆ "#ಾಂಕ 25-10-2010 ರಂದು $ಾ%&ೊಂ%ರುವ ಕ'ಯದ ಕಾರು ದ)ಾ*ೇಜು ಸಂ.ೆ/ 2640/2010-11 ರ01 ಾವರುವ ಮುಂಗಡ ಹಣ ರೂ.1000000000/-ಗಳನು ವ4ಾ $ಾ% ಉ6ದ 7ತ ರೂ.682723500/- ಗಳನು ಾವರುವದು ಕಂಡುಬರುತೆ. ಆದೆ ¸ÀzÀj PÀæAiÀÄzÀ PÀgÁj£À PÀArPÉ 35 gÀ°è cheque No.493011, HDFC Bank Ltd., Kasutrba Gandhi Marg, Bangalore. "#ಾಂಕ 25-07-2011 ರಂದು ೆ ಮೂಲಕ post dated ಾವರುವ ರೂ.1650000000/-ಗಳನು ಬ8ೆ9 ನಮೂ"ಸೇ ಮೆ $ಾ:ರು;ಾೆ. <ಾಗೂ ಸದ= ಕ'ಯದ ಕಾರು-ದ)ಾ*ೇಜು ಕಂ%&ೆ 8(f) ರ01 ಸದ= post dated ೆ ಮೂಲಕ ಾವರುವ ಮುಾ'ಂಕ ಶುಲ?ವನು @ಾವೇ #ಾ/Aಕ / ಅೆ #ಾ/Aಕ ಆೇಶಗಳನು <ೊರತು ೆ ಮೂಲಕ ಾವರುವ 7ತವನು B01ಸದಂ;ೆ ಷರತು Dರುವದು ಕಂಡುಬರುತೆ. <ಾಗೂ ಸದ= post dated cheque ಮೂಲಕ ಾವರುವ 7ತ ರೂ.1650000000/-ಗಳನು $ಾ!ಯನು ಕ'ಯದ ದ)ಾ*ೇEನ01 ನಮೂ"ಸೇ ಪ'*ಾ"ಗಳG ಮೆ$ಾ:ರುವದು ಕಂಡುಬರುತೆ. ಆದH=ಂದ ಮ<ಾIೇಖಾ®gÀ ಆKೇಪLೆಯನು ಒNO &ೊರ;ೆ ಶುಲ? ಾವಸಲು ಆೇPಸುವದು ಸೂಕ*ೆಂದು ಅQಾ'ಯಪಡIಾAತು. 14. ಕ#ಾRಟಕ ಮುಾ'ಂಕ &ಾTH 1957ರ ಕಲಂ 28 ರ% ಶುಲ? ಆಕರLೆ $ಾಡUೇ&ಾದ ಅಂಶಗಳ ಬ8ೆ9 ದ)ಾ*ೇEನ01 ನಮೂ"ಸುವದು ಕVಾWಯ*ಾXರುತೆ. ಪ'*ಾ"ಗಳG ಈ ಕYೇ=ಯ ಹಲವ #ೋZೕ[ಗಳನು \ೕಕ=ದHರೂ ಾರLೆ8ೆ <ಾಜಾXರುವ"ಲ1. <ಾಗೂ @ಾವೇ ಆKೇಪLೆಯನು ಸ01ರುವ¢®è. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 ಪ')ಾವ#ೆಯ01 ವ=ರುವ ಅಂಶಗಳ !#ೆIೆಯ01 <ಾಗೂ ಲಭ/ ರುವ ಾಖIೆಗಳ ಆ^ಾರದ _ೕIೆ ಪ'ಕರಣವನು ಆೇPಸುವದು ಸೂಕ*ೆಂದು ಅQಾ'ಯಪಡIಾAತು. ಮ<ಾIೇಖಾಲರು ಆKೇNರುವಂ;ೆ "#ಾಂಕ 25-07-2011 ರಂದು ಪ'*ಾ"ಗಳG ಸ\ನ $ಾ0ೕಕ=8ೆ Post dated cheque ಾವರುವ ಮುಂಗಡ ಹಣ ರೂ.1650000000/- ಗಳ ಅಂಶವನು ಮೆ $ಾ:ರುವದು ಸOಷ`*ಾಗುತೆ. ಆದH=ಂದ ಮ<ಾIೇಖಾಲರ ಆKೇಪLೆಯನು ಒNO &ೊರ;ೆ ಶುಲ? ಾವಸಲು ಈ &ೆಳಕಂಡಂ;ೆ ಆೇPೆ. ಆಆಆಆ ೇ ೇ ೇ ೇ ಶಶಶಶ ''f¯Áè¢üPÁj (ªÀÄÄzÁæAPÀ) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ f¯Áè £ÉÆÃAzÀuÁ¢üPÁj, eÁ® £ÉÆÃAzÀt f¯Éè, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ªÀÄÄzÁæAPÀ PÁAiÉÄÝ, 1957 gÀ PÀ®A 46-J gÀr ºÁUÀÆ £ÉÆÃAzÀt PÁAiÉÄÝ, 1908gÀ PÀ®A 80-J gÀr ¥ÀæzÀvÀÛªÁzÀ C¢üPÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¹, ¸ÀéwÛ£À ªÀiÁgÀÄPÀmÉÖ ªÀiË®åªÉAzÀÄ ¥ÀjUÀt¹ ªÀåvÁå¸ÀzÀ ±ÀÄ®ÌUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä F PɼÀPÀAqÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. 1 ಮೂರು ದ)ಾ*ೇಜುಗಳ01 ನಮೂ"ರುವಂ;ೆ ಸ\ನ ಒಟು` ªÀiË®å ರೂ. 2570000000 .00 2 "#ಾಂಕ 25-07-2011 ರಂದು Post dated cheque ಾವರುವ ಮುಂಗಡ ಹಣ ರೂ. 1650000000-00 3 ಸ\ನ ಒಟು` ªÀiË®å ರೂ. 4220000000-00 4 ಮುಾ'ಂಕ ಶುಲ? ಮತು #ೋಂದb ಶುಲ?ಗಳನು ಾವರುವ ªÀiË®å ರೂ. 2570000000-00 5 ವ/;ಾ/ಸದ ªÀiË®å ರೂ. 1650000000-00 6 ರೂ.1650000000/-ಗಳ ಮುಂಗಡ ಹಣದ _ೕIೆ ಾವಸUೇ&ಾದ ಮುಾ'ಂಕ ಶುಲ? cೇಕVಾ 5.65 ರಂ;ೆ ರೂ. 93225000-00 7 ರೂ.1650000000/-ಗಳ ಮುಂಗಡ ಹಣದ _ೕIೆ ಾವಸUೇ&ಾದ #ೋಂದb ಶುಲ? cೇಕVಾ 1 ರಂ;ೆ ರೂ. 16500000-00 8 ಒಟು` ಾವಸUೇ&ಾದ &ೊರ;ೆ ಶುಲ?ಗಳG ರೂ. 109725000-00 ಈ _ೕ0ನಂ;ೆ BಧR=ರುವ ಮುಾ'ಂಕ ಶುಲ? ರೂ.93225000/-, #ೋಂದb ಶುಲ? ರೂ.16500000/- ಗಳನು ಸ&ಾRರ&ೆ? ಾವಸಲು ಪ'*ಾ"ಗ68ೆ ಆೇPೆ. ಸದ= ಶುಲ?ವನು ಈ ಆೇಶ <ೊರ%ದ "#ಾಂಕ"ಂದ 60 "ನಗಳ ಒಳ8ಾX, "EIಾ1 #ೋಂದLಾD&ಾ=ಗಳG, 8ಾಂDನಗರ, Uೆಂಗಳdರು" (District Registrar, Gandhinagar, Bangalore) 2 0 2.2./ಹಣವನು ಾವ ಅಸಲು %.%./ೇ - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 ಆಡRರನು ಮುಂ"ನ ಕ'ಮ ;ೆ8ೆದು&ೊಳGeವ ಸಲು*ಾX ಈ #ಾ/@ಾಲಯ&ೆ? <ಾಜರುಪ%ಸತಕ?ದುH.'' 6. From the perusal of the aforesaid reasoning, it is clear that the only basis on which the impugned order is passed is alleged suppression of payment of Rs.165,00,00,000/- by the petitioner by way of post-dated cheques in terms of the agreement of sale dated 10.05.2012 produced at Annexure-D. 7. Though, in the agreement of sale dated 25.10.2010, the sale consideration is shown as Rs.265,00,00,000/-, however in the deeds of sale dated 30.09.2011, 02.11.2011 and 10.05.2012, the sale consideration is shown as Rs.165,27,23,500/-, Rs.30,15,50,300/- and Rs.58,57,26,512/- respectively aggregating in a sum of Rs.257,00,00,012/-. 8. The contention of respondent-authorities on the other hand, as noted above is, the alleged suppression of payment of Rs.165,00,00,000/-, which finds mention in the agreement of sale. 9. Annexure-K is a letter dated 19.07.2019 issued by the HDFC Bank, which is now produced along with the writ petition - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 would indicate that the said post-dated cheque has not been presented for encashment. 10. In that view of the matter, the very basis on which the impugned orders have been passed requires re- consideration. 11. In the light of the prima-facie grounds established by the petitioner, following: ORDER (i) Writ petition is allowed. (ii) Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, impugned Order dated 09.11.2017 passed by respondent No.1 as well as the Order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Authority are set-aside and the consequent notice dated 20.06.2019 issued by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-C is quashed. (iii) Matter is relegated to respondent No.1 to reconsider the matter afresh, taking into - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1148 WP No. 31712 of 2019 consideration the document, namely letter dated to 19.07.2019 issued by HDFC Bank addressed to the petitioner, indicating non-encashment of the post- dated cheque bearing No.493021, which was reflected in the agreement of sale dated 25.10.2010, after affording sufficient opportunity to the parties, pass appropriate order thereon. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13