Dismissed

Sree Narayana Probhoda Chandrodaya Yogam v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC8 Dec 2014WP(C)/3045/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed assessment and appellate orders, and a revenue recovery notice, for ignoring a pending exemption claim. It directed authorities to decide the exemption and pass fresh assessment orders within stipulated timelines.

What did the court decide?

Exts. P2, P4 and P6 quashed; 2nd respondent to pass exemption order within one month; 3rd respondent to pass fresh assessment order within three months.

Sree Narayana Probhoda Chandrodaya Yogam Vs State of… — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 3045 of 2010 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SREE NARAYANA PROBHODA CHANDRODAYA YOGAM, PONNEKKARA, KOCHI-41, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI.SEKHARAN, PONNEKKARA, EDAPPALLY.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.N.D.PREMACHANDRAN SMT.LALIZA.T.Y.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED TO SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (REVENUE) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶12

3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK.

¶13

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LILLY.K.T.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C).NO.3045/2010

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶18

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 11.6.2003.

¶19

EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.7.2008 ALONG WITH THE NOTICE OF DEMAND.

¶20

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM.

¶21

EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.8.2009 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶22

EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.12.2009.

¶23

EXT.P6: COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 23.1.2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 7 OF THE R.R. ACT.

¶24

EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION.

¶25

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.

¶26

//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P.S. TO JUDGE

¶28

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶29

W.P.(C).NO.3045 OF 2010 (E) ----------------------------------Dated this the 8^th day of December, 2014

¶30

J U D G M E N T

¶31

The petitioner is a Charitable organization that has constructed a building for accommodating its administrative office, library, nursery classes, training classes etc. The building tax assessment of the building put up by the petitioner was completed by Ext.P2 assessment order, whereby, a plinth area of 2157.81 sq.ft. was assessed to building tax. The case of the petitioner is that there are large portions of the building that will qualify for exemption in terms of Section 3(1)(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975. The claim for exemption has been referred to the Government for its decision in the matter. It is the petitioner's case that, contrary to the requirement of the Building Tax Act, the 3^rd respondent passed an order of assessment ignoring the claim of the petitioner for exemption. In an appeal preferred by the petitioner before the 2^nd respondent, the 2^nd respondent dismissed the appeal by Ext.P4 order without considering the case of the petitioner for exemption. Although the petitioner's claim for exemption is pending before the 1^st respondent, Ext.P6

¶32

W.P.(C).No.3045/2010

¶33

¶34

revenue recovery notice was served on the petitioner seeking to recover amounts assessed on the petitioner by way of building tax. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner has impugned Exts.P2, P4 and P6 in the present writ petition.

¶35

I have heard Sri.N.D.Premachandran, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also Smt.Lilly.K.T., the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶36

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I find that the issue regarding the grant of exemption to the building or parts thereof, belonging to the petitioner, is pending consideration before the 1^st respondent and no orders have been passed till date on the claim for exemption preferred by the petitioner. In that view of the matter, I feel that Ext.P2 assessment order and Ext.P4 appellate order, to the extent they do not consider the claim of the petitioner for exemption, cannot be legally sustained. Accordingly, I quash Exts.P2 and P4 orders, and Ext.P6 revenue recovery notice, and direct the 3^rd respondent Assessing Authority to pass fresh orders of assessment in

¶37

W.P.(C).No.3045/2010

¶38

¶39

respect of the building, after getting the orders of the 1^st respondent on the claim for exemption preferred by the petitioner which is stated to be pending before the 1^st respondent. The 1^st respondent shall pass an order on the claim for exemption preferred by the petitioner before it within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The 3^rd respondent shall thereafter, pass fresh orders in the matter within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order of the Government on the issue of exemption to the building put up by the petitioner.

¶40

The writ petition is disposed as above.

¶41

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶42

prp

Sree Narayana Probhoda Chandrodaya Yogam v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Narayana Probhoda Chandrodaya Yogam v. State of Kerala and Others

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

Boby Christopher Vs State of Kerala

Smitha Keloth Vs the State of Kerala

Venukumar M.S. Vs State of Kerala

K.R.Udayabhanu Vs Revenue Divisiional Officer & Others

State Faming Corporation of Kerala Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Samuel Daniel Vs the Principal Secretary to Government