E-Paper
RTI query reveals ₹11-crore discrepancy in stamp duty collection in Panipat district
A difference of ₹11.84 crore in stamp duty collection has been detected in the land registrations done in Panipat district tehsils in the past two financial years.
A difference of ₹11.84 crore in stamp duty collection has been detected in the land registrations done in Panipat district tehsils in the past two financial years.
As per the information provided by tehsildars of Panipat district under the Right to Information (RTI) Act to a local activist, Amit Rathi, a difference of ₹11.84 crore was found during the audit in the stamp duty deposited in all five tehsils of Panipat, Bapoli, Matlauda, Samalkha and Israna blocks for 557 land registrations done in 2018-2019 and 2019-2020.
“As per the reply from the tehsildars concerned, the stamp duty was not charged as per the rate fixed by the government, causing a revenue loss of ₹11.84 crore to the state exchequer,” the RTI activist said.
According to him, difference of ₹10.22 crore in the registration of 409 land deeds was reported in Panipat tehsil, ₹92.83 lakh in 24 land deeds in Matlauda, ₹22.55 lakh in 24 land deeds in Samalkha and ₹2.91 lakh in five land deeds in Israna tehsil.
As per the activist, the information was provided by the tehsildars, but no action was taken yet, which he claimed hinted at a scam.
“Even in the reply to the RTI query, all tehsildars have admitted that no action or inquiry has been ordered for the recovery of stamp duty so far,” he said, adding that he has filed a complaint at the CM Window for a detailed investigation and action against the erring officials for causing a revenue loss of around ₹12 crore to the state exchequer.
Panipat tehsildar Kuldeep Malik said this was not a scam as claimed by the RTI activist. “The difference in the collection of stamp duty was highlighted by the auditor of the revenue department and the amount is based on their assumptions. This is a routine process as there are provisions of recovery of the stamp duty highlighted by the auditor and if required, the matter will be taken up in the collector’s court,” he added
Despite repeated attempts, Panipat deputy commissioner Dharmender Singh’s comment could not be elicited as he neither responded to phone calls nor text messages.
