SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(SC) 519

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANGANATH MISRA, C.J.I. AND K.N. SAIKIA, J.
Yadlapati Venkateswarlu, Appellant

Versus

The State of A.P. and another, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2494 of 1978

Decided on 11-9-1990.

Advocates:
A.S.NAMBIYAR, A.SUBBA RAO, B.PARTHASARTHY, G.Prabhakar, K.RAM KUMAR

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Municipalities Act - Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 - Fourth Amendment Act - Section 4(1) – Taxation - Levy of property tax -Applicability of new Act - Result was that tax lawfully levied and continued to be levied under the old Act had to be continued unless council by resolution determined such other rate from time to time, and unless Government by general or special order otherwise directed under transitional provisions - Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. in exercise of its powers under aforesaid R. 12 of Schedule IX directing that all Municipal Councils, shall with effect from 1-4-1970 levy property tax as per provisions of new Act - Government directed the Municipal Council of Vijayawada to continue to levy the property tax under the provisions of the old Act as certain rate payers had filed writ petition in the High Court and obtained stay - Held, Court find force in the submission of Mr. Nambiar in this regard. The G.O. impugned before the High Court has been covered and validated by the above provisions, the G.O. itself covered the period after the repeal of the old Act and till the date of commencement of the Fourth Amendment so that no interregnum was really there. The assessment made according to the, provisions of the old Act were validated as actions taken by the council pursuant to the impugned G.O. and not under the provisions of the old Act which was already repealed. While referring to the old Act, the G.O. did not revive the Act but only prescribed the same procedure as was found in the repealed Act as a transitory measure - Validity of S. 4(1) of Fourth Amendment Act having not been challenged before the High Court, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgments of the High Court - Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

K.N. SAIKIA, J.:—This appeal by special leave is from the common Judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissing two writ appeals and a writ petition. The Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Municipalities Act, (hereinafter referred to as the old Act) was applicable to Vijayawada Municipality of Andhra Pradesh and property tax was levied under that Act. The Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the new Act) came into force on 2-4-1965. Section 2(11) of the new Act defined "council" to jnean "a municipal council constituted under this Act." Section 391(1) of the new Act repealed the old Act. Section 389 of the new Act provided:-

"389. Act to be read subject to Schedule IX in Regard to first reconstitution of councils etc.:- In regard to the first constitution of a council for any local area under S. 3, or to the first reconstitution in accordance with the provisions of this Act, of a council in existence at the commencement thereof, and otherwise in first giving effect to the provisions of this Act, this Act shall be read subject to the rules in schedule IX."

The Schedule IX to the new Act contained the transitional provisions in the rules therein. R. 12 thereof dealt with levy of taxes etc. and said .

" 12. Levy of taxes etc. any tax, cess or fee which was being lawfully levied by or on behalf of any council at the commencement of this Act and which may be lawfully levied under this Act, shall notwithstanding any change in the method or manner of assessment or levy of such tax, cess or fee be levied by or on behalf of the council at such rate as may be prevailing at such commencement or at such other rate as may be determined by the council from time to time, by a resolution for the year in which this Act is brought into force, and unless the Government by general or special order otherwise direct, for subsequent years also."

2. The result was that tax lawfully levied and continued to be levied under the old Act had to be continued unless the council by resolution determined such other rate from time to time, and unless the Government by general or special order otherwise directed under the transitional provisions. On 18-9-1969 the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Ms. No. 749 M.A. in exercise of its powers under the aforesaid R. 12 of Schedule IX directing that all Municipal Councils, shall with effect from 1-4-1970 levy the property tax as per the provisions of the new Act. But due to certain administrative difficulties the revision could not be completed before 1-4-1970 and the Government, therefore, issued G.O. Ms. No. 293 M.A. dated 18-4-1970 directing the Municipal Councils to levy the property tax as per ine provisions of the new Act from 1- 10- 1970. By another G.O. Ms. No. 81 M.A. dated 30-1-1971 the Government directed the Municipal Council of Vijayawada to continue to levy the property tax under the provisions of the old Act as certain rate payers had filed writ petition in the High Court and obtained stay. However, by G.O. Ms. No. 675 M.A. the G.O. Ms. No. 81 was rescinded and the Vijayawada Municipal Council was directed to collect revised taxes under the provisions of the new Act with effect from 1-10-1970. This latter G.O. Ms. No. 675 was in its turn rescinded by G.O. Ms. No. 255 M.A. dated 15-6-73 whereby the Government ordered that the Vijayawada Municipal Council shall continue to levy the property tax under the provisions of the old Act and that G.O. was to be deemed to have come into force from 1-10-1970. As a result the Vijayawada Municipality continued to levy and enhance the property tax under the provisions of the old Act. It may be mentioned that under S. 82 of the old Act property, tax was levied on the basis of gross annual rental value, whereas under S. 87 of the new Act the basis of assessment in owner occupied building was the capital value thereof to be determined in the prescribed manner.

3. The G.O. Ms. No. 255 dated 15-6-1973 was challenged by




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top