Remanded

Ultra Modern Workshop, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Dec 2018WP(C)/40032/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Government orders rejecting a workshop's building tax exemption claim. The Court found the orders violated natural justice due to lack of prior notice and remanded the matter to the Government for fresh hearing and potential refund.

What did the court decide?

Set aside Ext.P7 and P8; remanded to Government to hear the petitioner; direct refund if exempted.

Ultra Modern Workshop, Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 40032 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

ULTRA MODERN WORKSHOP, K.V.R CARS- REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER K.N JAYARAJAN, P.O MAILATTY, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN 671 319

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SMT.VANDANA MENON SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR VINEETHA JAMES

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE (S.C) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

¶11

2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD 671 121

¶12

3 THE TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD DISTRICT 671 121

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

DR THUSHARA JAMES, GP

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C). No. 40032 of 2018

¶17

-2-

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner claims to run a workshop, which ought to be exempted from paying the building tax. But when the petitioner's building was assessed to tax, the petitioner objected. Acting on his objection, the Revenue Divisional Officer set aside the assessment order and remanded the matter to the Tahsildar, the primary authority. In turn, the primary authority referred the matter to the Government. It all seems to have happened in 2010. Now in October 2018, the Government issued the Ext.P7 order rejected the petitioner's claim. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶20

The petitioner's counsel contends that in all these eight years, the petitioner has never received any notice from the Government on his claim for exemption. According to him, the Ext.P7 order suffers from the vice of violating the natural justice.

¶21

The Government Pleader, on instructions, fairly submits that the Government has not notified the petitioner before its passing the Ext.P7 order and the Ext.P8 consequential order.

¶22

W.P.(C). No. 40032 of 2018

¶23

-3-

¶24

Under these circumstances, I set aside the Exts.P7 and P8 and remand the matter to the Government. The first respondent will hear the petitioner and then pass appropriate orders. And if the Government finds that the building is exempted under Section 3(1)(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, it will refund whatever amounts

¶25

the petitioner has so far paid as building tax.

¶26

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

JUDGE

das

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WORKSHOP EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WORKSHOP EXHIBIT P1 B TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WORKSHOP EXHIBIT P1 C TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WORKSHOP

¶34

W.P.(C). No. 40032 of 2018

¶35

-4-

¶36

EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL OF THE CONSENT ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION BOARD DATED 6-7-2018
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FACTORIES AND BOILERS DATED 27-01-2016
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNDER SUB SEC. 2 OF SECTION 9 OF THE KERALA BUILDING TAX ACT DATED 5-8-2009.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19-01-2010.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12-1-2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, REJECTING THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER FOR EXEMPTION DT. 3- 10-2018
EXHIBIT P7 A	TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P7
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 17-10-2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT, DEMANDING A SUM OF RS. 1,48,500/- AS THE BALANCE AMOUNT TOWARDS BUILDING TAX FOR THE WORKSHOP.
EXHIBIT P8 A	TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EX.P8

Ultra Modern Workshop, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ultra Modern Workshop, v. State of Kerala

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. Kaladharan Vs the District Collector, Kollam

Binu K.P. Vs Union of India

A.Chandrakumaran Nair Vs Union of India

Aboobacker Vs Assistant Labour Officer

Synthite Industries Employees Union (Citu) Vs District Labour Officer (Enforcement) and Returning Officer

Rajan K.S Vs the Chief Welfare Fund Inspector