Writ petition against building tax and luxury tax assessment orders on petitioner's building in Udumbannoor Village. The court held that disputed questions of fact regarding plinth area cannot be decided in a writ petition and dismissed it, leaving the petitioner free to file an appeal.
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 DINESH KUMAR SINGH
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 26TH POUSHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 10156 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:
ALBERT MARTIN,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. MARTIN CHACKO, AGED 30 YEARS, PAMPARAYIL HOUSE,
THATTAKKUZHA POST OFFICE, UDUMBANNOOR VILLAGE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685581
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE TAHSILDAR, THODUPUZHA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 6855842 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IDUKKI, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 6856033 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
OTHER PRESENT:
RESHMITA RAMACHANDRAN-GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WPC No.10156 of 2023
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 16th day of January, 2024
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning Exts.P2 and P13 assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent in respect of the building tax and luxury tax on the building of the petitioner.
3
WPC No.10156 of 2023
judgment dated 15.11.2022 directing the petitioner to remit the luxury tax assessed in terms of Ext.P2 for the period upto December 2022 with direction to the Assessing Authority to consider the matter afresh whether any luxury tax was actually payable by the petitioner or not. The Assessing Authority was also directed to consider any documents or materials that may be placed by the petitioner to show that petitioner was not liable to make payment of the luxury tax. On remand, the Assessing Authority has examined the documents and has passed the impugned order in Ext.P13. Now, the petitioner has approached this Court against the said order, though there is remedy of appeal and revision under Sections 11 and 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act.
What is the plinth area of the building is a disputed question of fact, which cannot be decided in the writ petition. Whether the plinth area of the building is 543.70 m.sq or less, is to be decided on the basis of the evidence measurement and other facts taken into consideration. This Court finds no ground to interfere with the assessment
WPC No.10156 of 2023
4
orders and therefore the writ petition is dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioner to file appeal if so advised against the assessment orders.
Sd/-
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
JUDGE
AP
WPC No.10156 of 2023
5
PETITIONER EXHIBITS |
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10156/2023 |
|---|---|
Exhibit P1 |
TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THEASSESSING AUTHORITY BEARING DATE 07.09.2021,ASSESSING THE BUILDING TAX |
Exhibit P2 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THEASSESSING AUTHORITY BEARING DATE 07.09.2021,ASSESSING THE LUXURY TAX |
Exhibit P3 |
TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THEASSESSING AUTHORITY BEARING DATE 07.09.2021,ASSESSING THE PROJECT CESS |
Exhibit P4 |
TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILEDBY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUEDIVISIONAL OFFICER, IDUKKI DATED 20.07.2022,WITHOUT ENCLOSURES |
Exhibit P5 |
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.09.2021,EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 14, 321/- AS1ST INSTALMENT OF RS. 13, 260/-, AS BUILDINGTAX AND RS. 1, 061/- AS HOUSING PROJECT CESS |
Exhibit P6 |
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 12.01.2022,EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 13, 275/-, AS2ND INSTALMENT OF BUILDING TAX |
Exhibit P7 |
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 06.04.2022,EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF RS. 13, 260/-, AS3RD INSTALMENT OF BUILDING TAX |
Exhibit P8 |
TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.09.2021,EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RS. 15, 000/- TOWARDSLUXURY TAX FOR THE YEAR 2021- 22 AND 2022- 23 |
Exhibit P9 |
TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REVENUEDIVISIONAL OFFICER, IDUKKI, DATED 16.08.2022,REJECTING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONERBY WAY OF EXHIBIT P4 |
Exhibit P10 |
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.11.20222IN WRIT PETITION [CIVIL] NO. 33262 OF 2022 |
Exhibit P11 |
TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 21.11.2022SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER BEFORETHE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 14.12.2022 |
Exhibit P12 |
TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUILDING AND THECOVERED ROOF . |
Exhibit P13 |
TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1STRESPONDENT DATED 30.01.2023 |
Exhibit P14 |
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2018[1] KLT 974 |
Exhibit P15 |
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.11.2008,IN WPC 24487 OF 2005 (M) |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging building tax and luxury tax assessment orders should be entertained when plinth area is a disputed question of fact.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Albert Martin
The Tahsildar, Thodupuzha Taluk
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Idukki
State of Kerala, represented by its Secretary, Department of Revenue
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court