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

2017 Supreme(Del) 450

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. RAVINDRA BHAT & NAJMI WAZIRI, JJ.
SPRINGDALES SCHOOL - Petitioner
Versus
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 6417 of 2015
Decided On : 08-02-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sh. B.B. Jain with Sh. Abhay Jain, Sh. Amitava Marwah and Sh. Akhil. P. Chhabra, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Sh. Rajan Sabharwal, Standing Counsel.

The Court clarified the requirements for a valid notice under Section 123D, the time limit for exercising power under Section 123D, and the compliance with Section 170(b) for multiple years' assessments.

Headnote:

Property Tax - Assessment Order - Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, Section 123D

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner school challenged a Show Cause Notice and Assessment Order issued by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation. The petitioner contended that the notice was vague and the assessment order was based on erroneous premises. It also argued that the alternative remedy of an appeal was inefficacious and impracticable due to changes in the assessment mechanism.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the notice and assessment order were unsustainable due to lack of specificity and arbitrary application of the Unit Area Method. It also ruled that the power under Section 123D cannot be exercised beyond one year after the expiry of the assessment period mentioned in Section 123B(10). The Court directed the refund of deposited amounts and declared the correct Use Factor applicable to the petitioner school.

Issues: Vagueness of the notice, erroneous assessment order, inefficacy of the appeal remedy, and arbitrary application of the Unit Area Method.

Ratio Decidendi: The notice under Section 123D must contain specific particulars, the power under Section 123D cannot be exercised beyond one year after the expiry of the assessment period, and compliance with Section 170(b) requires deposit of one year's tax demand for multiple years' assessments.

Final Decision: The Show Cause Notice and Assessment Order were quashed, the Use Factor applicable to the petitioner school was declared as 1, and the respondents were directed to work out the refund with interest for the amounts deposited by the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.

1. The petitioner school is aggrieved by a Show Cause Notice dated 24.01.2013 and consequential Assessment Order dated 19.06.2015, both issued by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (hereafter called “the Corporation”).

2. The admitted facts are that the petitioner has and continues to file returns as required by the provisions of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 [hereafter “the Act”] in respect of the premises under its control. It also deposits the municipal taxes and property taxes in terms of its returns from time to time. With the amendment to the Act in 2003 and the introduction of the “Unit Area Method” of valuation and consequential assessment, it consistently reported and paid taxes on a self-assessment basis. While doing so, on 24.01.2013, it received a notice in the following terms :

“M/s. Patel Education Society

Springdales School,

Pusa Road, New Delhi-05

Subject: Assessment of Property no.Springdales School, Pusa Road Under Section 123D of DMC (Amendment) Act, 2003.

Whereas, as per available record, Self-assessment Property Tax Return, as required u/s 123A & 123B of the DMC Act has not been found filed by your for the period

OR

Whereas, in the Self-Assessment Property Tax Return, filed for the year_____the following discrepancies have been found:

Due to wrongly PTR and the XXX paid of property tax of play ground.

And therefore, invoking the powers conferred u/s 123D of the DMC Act, you are hereby given an opportunity to appear before the undersigned in person or through your authorised representative on 29.1.2013 at 11 AM and to produce the relevant evidences and documents in support of your case of property at M/s. Patel Education Society, Springdales School and as to why the assessment should not be made/revised/reopened.

You may bring to our attention any stay/direction from any Court with regard to assessment/payment of property tax or having already, filed the correct PTR alongwith the payment of due tax, failing which it will be presumed that you have nothing to say and, thereafter, the assessment will be finalized on the basis of information available, without further communication to you, thereby precluding you from objecting to any assessment made. You may also be liable for interest or/and penalty in addition to tax, as per provisions of DMC Act.”

3. It is contended by the petitioner that the notice is vague and entirely unspecific so far as it does not relate to any year or spell out particulars with respect to the so called alleged default or suppression of material facts practiced by it. In these circumstances, it was on account of repeated coercion exercised by the respondents’ inspectors, who continued to frequently visit them, that the petitioner was compelled to part with Rs.21,65,000/-. Ultimately, it received the impugned assessment order dated 19.06.2015; the said order/assessment notice reads as follows :

       “No. Tax/NDMC/A85C/KBZ/201S-16/D-762

Dated 19.06.2015

       Name of the Taxpayer: Springdales School,

(The Springdales Education Society)

Property Address: Pusa Road, Upper Ridge Road Junction, New Delhi-110005.

Assessment Order under Section 123D of DMC(Amendment) Act 2003.

In the instant case, a notice u/s 123 D of DMC (Amendment) Act, 2003 dated 24.1.2013 was issued due to filing of wrong/incorrect Property Tax Return and non-payment of property tax on vacant plot meant for playground.

Again a letter dated 28.1.2015 explaining the deficiency in detail was sent to the taxpayer and was further requested to deposit the difference of tax within fifteen days from issue of letter. In response to letter dated 28.1.2015, the taxpayer deposited an amount of Rs. 21,65,000.00 only through various cheques dated 20.3.2015, 27.3.2015 and 16.4.2015 as 'on account payment' for the period 2004-05 to 2014-15. Finally, a letter dated 25.5.2015 was sent to the taxpayer request


















































































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