Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Rohini Educational Society - Appellant
Versus
North Delhi Municipal Corporation - Respondent
W.P.(C) 9020 of 2021 & CM Appls. 28036 of 2021, 28037 of 2021 and 28041 of 2021
Decided On : 26-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner contests property tax assessment. (Para 2) |
| 2. petitioner argues incorrect occupancy factor applied. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. respondents acknowledge assessment errors. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court quashes tax notices, orders fresh assessment. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. petition allowed; order to be communicated. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (ORAL)--The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner impugns demand notice dated 19.03.2021 along with the property tax bills dated 08.07.2021 and 06.08.2021 issued by respondent No.2 for the period 2020-2021 and 2021-2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the assessing authority has applied occupancy factor 3 whereas occupancy factor 1 should have been applied.
4. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been regularly filing the property tax returns and no show cause notice or hearing was granted to the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned order.
5. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that on account of an error some incorrect computation has been done in the assessment order and in view of the submission of the petitioner that no hearing has been granted, respondent Corporation is willing to grant a hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a fresh speaking assessment order.
7. In view of the above, impugned notice dated 19.03.2021 and the consequent property tax bills dated 08.07.2021 and 06.08.2021 are quashed.
8. The matter is remitted to the Assessing Authority. Petitioner shall file additional reply/objections, if any within a period of two weeks. Thereafter the assessing authority shall pass a fresh order after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner.
9. Petition is allowed in the above terms.
10. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
Procedural fairness requires that a taxpayer is entitled to a personal hearing before tax assessment orders are finalized.
Procedural fairness requires clear communication of discrepancies and an opportunity for defense in tax assessment processes.
Proper opportunity of hearing and clear show cause notice are essential before passing an assessment order.
A property tax assessment must be preceded by a specific and detailed show cause notice; otherwise, the assessment is invalid.
The principle of natural justice and the requirement for factual accuracy in assessment orders were central to the court's decision.
Property assessments must adhere to procedural requirements, ensuring notice and the right to a hearing before final orders are made.
Court reinforces the need for proper assessment procedures in property tax matters, emphasizing compliance with prior judicial directives and the provision of fair hearing.
The assessing authority must consider submitted objections before amending the assessment list, ensuring compliance with statutory obligations and providing fair opportunity for hearing.
Property tax – Assessment - Petitioner/authorized representative shall appear before Assistant Assessor and Collector, ASC Department and produce requisite documents in support of assessment.
Quash of Assessment – Demand notice - Order records to the contrary that no response has been received from the recorded owner with regard to the said notice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
