Remanded

M/S Popular Advertisers v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Jul 2023WP/10875/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Division Bench held that orders imposing tax on hoardings and advertisements were passed without hearing the petitioner. The court set aside the orders and remanded the matter to the Assistant Revenue Officer to afford an opportunity for a hearing and decide afresh.

What did the court decide?

The orders passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer were set aside; the matter was remanded to proceed afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

M/S Popular Advertisers Vs State of Karnataka — Consumer Protection | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:25367 WP No. 10875 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 10875 OF 2017 (LB-BMP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S POPULAR ADVERTISERS A PROPRIETARY BUSINESS CONCERN IN

¶9

OUTDOOR ADVERTISEMENT AGENCY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.400 ROYAL CORNER NO.1 & 2, LALBAGH ROAD BENGALURU-560027 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR MANMOHAN SINGH MAAN

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. V B SHIVA KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by DHARMALINGAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA VIDHANA VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

¶15

THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR GOVT., HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA VIDHANA VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001

¶16

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE

¶17

- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:25367 WP No. 10875 of 2017

¶18

CORPORATION OFFICES N R SQUARE, J C ROAD BENGALURU-560002 BY ITS COMMISSIONER

¶19

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER WEST ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU

¶20

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER T DASARAHALLI ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560009

¶21

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER SOUTH ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560009

¶22

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER BOMMANAHALLI ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560068

¶23

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER EAST ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560027

¶24

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER YELHANKA ZONE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560027

¶25

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER MAHADEVAPURA ZONE

¶26

¶27

NC: 2023:KHC:25367 WP No. 10875 of 2017

¶28

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560034

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SRI. SANTHOSH KUMAR M.B., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2., SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H. DEVENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R10)

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE IMPOSITION OF TAXES AS CONTRARY TO THE PARENT PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT 1976 AND IMPOSING TAX AS PROVIDED UNDER THE COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF ADVERTISEMENT TAX ANNEX-A DTD.25.9.2006, NOTIFICATION DTD.29.9.2006, KARNATAKA GAZETTE DTD.12.10.2006 AND ANOTHER NOTIFICATION DTD.25.9.2006 NOTIFICATION DTD.29.9.2006, AND THE COMPARATIVE STATEMENT VIDE ANNEX-A1. AND ETC.,

¶32

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶35

Learned counsel Sri V.B. Shiva Kumar, appearing for

¶36

the petitioner submits that demands have been raised by

¶37

the concerned Revenue Officer in respect of the Hoardings/Advertisements/Display Boards for the year 2016.

¶38

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:25367 WP No. 10875 of 2017

¶39

2. Learned counsel submits that subsequently, by

¶40

way of policy decision, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike has stopped granting permissions for putting up Advertisement Boards, hoardings, etc. The learned counsel would therefore submit that since these are all old claims and demands have been raised and orders have been passed without hearing the petitioner, learned counsel would submit that the matter may be remitted back to the concerned Assistant Revenue Officer to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass orders in accordance with law.

¶41

Accepting the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms:

¶42

i) The orders passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer or the Competent Authority, are set aside.

¶43

ii) The matter stands remanded back to the concerned Assistant Revenue Officers/Competent Officers who have

¶44

NC: 2023:KHC:25367 WP No. 10875 of 2017

¶45

¶46

issued demand notices/orders for reconsideration afresh. Opportunity shall be granted to the writ petitioner to file written objections and thereafter, the parties shall be heard and orders shall be passed in accordance with law.

¶47

iii) The petitioner herein is permitted to file written objections before the concerned Assistant Revenue Officers/Competent Officers who have issued the demand notices/orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶48

Accordingly, concerned officers shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, proceed to pass orders in accordance with law.

¶49

Ordered accordingly.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

JT/-

M/S Popular Advertisers v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Popular Advertisers v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr K Venkatachalam Vs the Commissioner

Raymond Ltd. Vs the Commissioner

Pavan Bhadraiah Vs the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahangara Palike

Vaishak N Naik Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Sri. Chinnaswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Lehari Damji Patel Vs the Hoskote Yojana Pradhikara