RAMESH KUMAR DATTA, J.:–

I.A. No. 4324 of 2015:

The interlocutory application has been filed for condonation of delay of 215 days in filing the appeal.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances mentioned in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

I.A. No. 4324 of 2015 is, accordingly, disposed of.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-Nagar Parishad, Khagaria.

2. The appeal is directed against the order dated 18.10.2012 passed in CWJC No. 19784 of 2012 by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which the writ petition has been disposed of with the observation that the municipal rates provided under the notification of the State Government dated 9.5.2011 shall be applicable to the Municipal holdings with effect from the date of issue of the notification and liberty was granted to the premises owner to question any assessment made on the basis of the said notification with regard to wrong classification of the municipal holding as commercial. The Nagar Parishad is aggrieved by the aforesaid order to the extent that the said notification dated 9.5.2011 has been held to operate prospectively whereas Nagar Parishad has been collecting taxes from 1.4.2010.

3. The sole question, therefore, in this appeal is as to whether the appellant could have imposed the new enhanced taxes with effect from 1.4.2010 to which the approval itself has been granted by the State Government on 9.5.2011.

4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the Khagaria Nagar Parishad is not a new Municipal Board, rather it has been in existence since 1981 and has been collecting holding taxes since then. It is submitted by learned counsel that there is no provision in the Bihar Municipal Act to collect taxes at any rate by the Municipal Board and the power to collect such taxes flows from the provisions of Article 243 X of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the notification dated 9.5.2011 clearly is in the nature of approval which will operate from the date from which the Municipality had been collecting the taxes.

5. In support of the same, learned counsel relies upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Associate Cement Companies Limited Vs. State of M.P. & anr. : (2005) 5 SCC 347 particularly, paragraphs 14 to 16 of the said judgment.

6. For a proper consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, the provisions of Article 243-X of the Constitution of India and Section 127 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 are quoted below:—

Article 243X. Power to impose taxes by, and Funds of, the Municipalities.— The Legislature of a State may, by law—

(a) authorize a Municipality to levy, collect and appropriate such taxes duties, tolls and fees in accordance with such procedure and subject to such limits;

(b) assign to a Municipality such taxes, duties, tolls and fees levied and collected by the State Government for such purposes and subject to such conditions and limits;

(c) provide for making such grants-in-aid to the Municipalities from the Consolidated Fund of the State; and

(d) provide for constitution of such Funds for crediting all moneys received, respectively by or on behalf of the Municipalities and also for the withdrawal of such moneys therefrom,

as may be specified in the law.”

“Section 127. Power to levy taxes.— (1) Subject to the provisions of section 10, the Municipality shall have, for the purposes of this Act, the power to levy the following taxes:—

(a) property tax on lands and buildings (including vacant land)

(b) surcharge on transfer of lands and buildings,

(c) tax on deficit in parking spaces in any non-residential building,

(d) water tax,

(e) fire tax,

(f) tax on advertisements, other than advertisements published in newspapers,

(g) surcharge on entertainment tax

(h) surcharge on electricity consumption within the municipal area,

(i) tax on congregations,

(j) tax on pilgrims and tourists, and

(k) toll –

(i) on roads, bridges, ferries and navigable channel and

(ii) on heavy trucks whi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document