In an original petition, the petitioner challenged a revised building tax assessment, arguing the taxable event was the 1995 building completion. The court held the rate applicable on the completion date governed and quashed the assessment order.
The assessment proceedings numbered Ext.P6 are quashed; the Original Petition is allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
TUESDAY, THE 10TH APRIL 2007 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1929
OP.No. 4526 of 1999(L)
-----------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
C.O.ITTY MATHEW, CHERUATHOOR HOUSE, KANIPAYYOOR P.O., KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.ASHOKAN
RESPONDENTS:
----------------------
1. THE TAHASILDAR, TALAPPILLY, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED RAFIQ (SR)
THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/04/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER ON CMP. NOS.7826/1999 IN CMP. 444/2000 IN OP. 4526/1999
DISMISSED
10.04.2006
SD/- K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE RETURN DT.29.12.95 UNDER SECTION 7 (1) (3) OF THE KERALA BUILDING TAX ACT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.8.8.96 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 22.8.1996.
EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DT.22.12.98 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.20.1.99 TO THEN1ST RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.28487(14) DT.30.1.1999 SIGNED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.
/TRUE COPY/
tss
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
O.P. NO. 4526 OF 1999-L
JUDGMENT
The petitioner constructed a building and it was completed on 6.12.1995. He filed Ext.P1 returns under the Building Tax Act on 29.12.1995. The Tahsildar called the petitioner for a hearing on 21.8.1996, by Ext.P2 notice dated 8.8.1996. He appeared and the tax was assessed as per Ext.P3 assessment order dated 22.8.1996. The petitioner paid the tax. Later, he was called for a hearing on 5.1.1999 by Ext.P4 notice dated 22.12.1998. He was told that the tax is going to be revised, as the rate of building tax was revised by the Government with effect from 29.7.1996, without knowing that, the assessment was made on 22.8.1996. So, the petitioner was informed of the proposal to revise his tax. Feeling aggrieved by the said stand, the petitioner filed Ext.P5 objection. But, without considering Ext.P5, Ext.P6 proceedings have been issued, revising the tax. The petitioner submits, the taxable event is the completion of the building or occupation of the building, whichever is earlier. Both the events happened in 1995. So, the revision of the rate of tax enforced with effect from 29.7.1996 cannot be made applicable to his building.
Op 4526/99
2
revised assessment.
The Original Petition is allowed as above.
10th April, 2007.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE
nm/
Op 4526/99
3
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J.
O.P. NO.4526/1999-L
JUDGMENT
10.4.2007
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the rate of building tax should be based on the date of completion or the date of the assessment.
Whether the assessment order revising tax based on later rates was sustainable.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
C.O. ITTY MATHEW
THE TAHASILDAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT
THE STATE OF KERALA
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
