Partly allowed

M/s.Indira Gandhi Matriculation School v. The Commissioner

Madras HC19 Apr 2021WP/30556/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging property tax assessment notices issued to an educational institution. The Court held that assessment notices are not final proceedings and the petitioner must first exhaust remedies under the relevant Acts and Rules before approaching this Court for relief.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue appeals or representations to competent authorities to exhaust remedies provided under the Act and Rules.

M/s.Indira Gandhi Matriculation School Vs The Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 19.04.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.Nos.30556 & 30560 of 2018

¶6

and W.M.P.Nos.35643 & 35646 of 2018

¶7

M/s.Indira Gandhi Matriculation School,

¶8

Rep., by its Correspondent, Mrs.Neelambal Sathyakumar .. Petitioner in both W.Ps.

¶9

-vs1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ribon Building, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai-600 003. 2.The Assistant Revenue Officer, Corporation of Chennai-Zone XII, New Street, Alandur, Chennai-600 016. .. Respondents in both W.Ps.

¶10

Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2^nd respondent relating to the proceeding made in Assessment Notices 6/18-19/170689 and 6/1819/170688 dated 31.05.2018 and to quash the same, and consequently direct the respondents from levying property tax to the petitioner's school in view of the exemption having been granted.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar (In both W.Ps.) For Respondents : Ms.Karthikaa Ashok, (In both W.Ps.) Standing Counsel

¶12

****** COMMON ORDER

¶13

The assessment notices dated 31.05.2018 for recovery of property tax from the petitioner-Institution are under challenge in the present writ petitions.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

2.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitionerInstitution made a submission that the petitioner-Institution was initially exempted from payment of property tax under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920. Now, the Institution is falling within the jurisdiction of Corporation of Chennai and the respondents have initiated action for recovery of property tax from the petitioner, however, the petitionerInstitution is paying the property tax without prejudice to their claim to agitate the ground of exemption.

¶16

3.The learned Standing Counsel for the respondentCorporation made a submission that the earlier exemption granted under the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 in favour of the petitioner is no more a good decision, in view of the fact that the policy decision to grant such exemption was scrapped by the Government in the year 2018 itself and as of now, no such exemption was granted to any school across the State of Tamil Nadu and therefore, the petitioner-Institution is liable to pay property tax as assessed by the competent authorities under the provisions of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.

¶17

4.As far as the impugned orders are concerned, this Court is of the considered opinion that there are only assessment notices. The said assessment notices are not final proceedings and the petitioner-Institution has to exhaust the remedies contemplated under the provisions of the Act and Rules.

¶18

5.In view of the above observations, the reliefs as such sought for in the present writ petitions cannot be granted. However, The petitioner-Institution is at liberty to pursue the appeal, if any, already submitted or make a fresh representation or appeal along with all relevant documents and evidences to the authorities concerned to exhaust the remedies provided under the Act and Rules and in the manner known to law.

¶19

6.Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

abr

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

¶25

1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ribon Building, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai-600 003.

¶26

2.The Assistant Revenue Officer, Corporation of Chennai-Zone XII, New Street, Alandur, Chennai-600 016.

¶27

+2cc to Mr.L.Chandrakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.23804, 23805 +1cc to M/s.Karthikaa Ashok, Advocate, S.R.No.23766

¶28

W.P.Nos.30556 & 30560 of 2018
GMR(CO)
CB(21/06/2021)

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s.Indira Gandhi Matriculation School v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Indira Gandhi Matriculation School v. The Commissioner

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

E.Sumathy Vs The Commissioner

M/S.Srinivasa Enterprises Vs the Sub Registrar

P.Udaya Shankar, Vs Income Tax Settlement

K.Purushotham Vs The Commissioner

S.P.Rajagopalan Vs The Secretary

B.Ravi Vs Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board