Back
2002 Supreme(Guj) 756
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :KUNDAN SINGH, R.K.Abichandani
KANAIYA PRINTS PRIVATE LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
ASSESSMENT AND RECOVERY OFFICER - Respondent
S.C.A. 1702 of 1997
Decided On : 10/08/2002
Headnote:
Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 – Petitioners have challenged the special notices dated 1 3/02/1996 issued to them by the respondent - Municipal Corporation under Rules 15 (2) and 20 (2) of Act, 1949 informing the petitioners that entries were made in the assessment book under Rule 9 (a), (b), © and (d) of the said Rules, and that if they have any objection against the same, they may be filed within the time mentioned in the notice – Held, BY Rule 21b, it is provided that, nothing in the foregoing provisions of the Chapter VIII shall affect the preparation and completion of the assessment book or of any part thereof or of any entry therein after the expiry of the year to which it relates, if such preparation or completion was not possible before the expiry of the year on account of any order of a Court or any other competent authority, and the levy, collection and recovery of any tax based on such assessment book, part or as the case may be, entry shall not be called in question merely on the ground that the assessment book, part, or, as the case may be, entry was not prepared or completed during the year to which it related. 8. 1 the contention that the notification by which the areas covered by the plots of the petitioners were included in the City area with effect from 15-11-1994 should be treated as an order of the competent authority within the meaning of Rule 21b is nothing but an exercise in desperation. It cannot be said that, by issuance of such a notification, it was not possible for the Commissioner to complete the assessment book or any part thereof or any entry made therein before the expiry of the year to which it related. The assessment and levy in respect of the period from 15-11-1994 upto 31-3-1995 was obviously required to be completed in the official year ending on 31/03/1995 -As per the settled legal position, the assessment must be completed before the close of the official year [anand Mills case (supra)]. Therefore, to this limited extent, the recovery sought to be made for the period – Notice to the extent to which the impugned notice relates to the aforesaid period of and purports to assess the taxes for that period, it cannot be sustained, and if any recovery of tax is effected for that period, the petitioners would be entitled to adjustment of the same. 8. 2 the impugned special notices dated 13-2-1996 are, therefore, declared to be inoperative only to the limited extent to which they related to the assessment of taxes for the period from 15-11-1994 to 31-3-1995, and the petitioners would be entitled to adjustment of the taxes recovered, if any, for the said period. Rule is made absolute.
( 1 ) IN this group of petitions raising identical dispute, the petitioners have challenged the special notices dated 1 3/02/1996 issued to them by the respondent - Municipal Corporation under Rules 15 (2) and 20 (2) of Chapter VIII of the Schedule to the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 informing the petitioners that entries were made in the assessment book under Rule 9 (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the said Rules, and that if they have any objection against the same, they may be filed within the time mentioned in the notice. There is also a prayer in all these petitions seeking a declaration that the respondents had charged Rs. 25=00 from the petitioners on the complaint form illegally, and that it should be refunded. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these matters stated before us that the petitioners were not pressing for this relief in these matters.
( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioners, their plots of Pandesara Industrial Estate were brought within the extended limits of the respondent No. 2 - Corporation with effect from 15/11/1994. Before that, the limits of the respondent Corporation had been extended with effect from 1/04/1986 when these plots of the Pandesara Industrial Estate of the GIDC had continued to remain within the revenue limits of Bamroli - Vadod Group Gram Panchayat. In the year 1990, the said Group Gram Panchayat was bifurcated and the plots in question came within the jurisdiction of the separated Vadod Gram Panchayat. According to the petitioners, the property taxes were levied by Vadod Gram Panchayat since 1990 in respect of their plots. It is their case that, till the official year ending on 31/03/1995, the taxes were payable to Vadod Gram Panchayat. After these plots were brought within the limits of the Municipal Corporation w. e. f. 15-11-1994, the taxes imposed by the Corporation became applicable to them by virtue of section 129 of the said Act. The respondent No. 1, therefore, served upon the petitioners special notices dated 13-2-1996 informing them about the proposed rateable value of their respective plots fixed by it w. e. f. 15-11-1994. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondents have no authority to issue such special notices fixing rateable value of these plots w. e. f. 15-11-1994 for the period for which the taxes were already levied by the Vadod Gram Panchayat, which was the predecessor of the respondent Corporation, for the period upto 3 1/03/1995, and that the respondents can only fix the rateable value of these plots w. e. f. the assessment year starting after the expiry of the official year ending on 31st March 1995.
( 3 ) THE respondent Corporation has filed the affidavit-in-reply in Special Civil Applications Nos. 2267 of 1996 and 7462 of 1996, contending that the petitioners had not produced any evidence to show that they had paid taxes to Vadod Gram Panchayat till 31st March 1995. It is stated that there is no dispute about the fact that earlier some plots of Pandesara Industrial Estate area were included within the limits of the Corporation w. e. f. 1-4-1986 and that, out of that estate, certain plots were left out and had remained within the limits of the Gram Panchayat. It is stated that the said left out area of GIDC was included within the limits of Surat Municipal Corporation w. e. f. 15-11-1994. According to the Corporation, each plot of the Pandesara Industrial Estate (Vadod) was inspected at the site and requisition forms were given to each of the petitioners for tendering adequate and proper evidence and thereafter, the assessment was made following the procedure laid down under the rules. It is stated that, since the said area was included within the limits of the Corporation w. e. f. 15-11-1994, the assessment was made from that day. According to the Corporation, in view of the provisions of Rule 21a of Chapter VIII of the Schedule to the said Act, the Corporation was entitled to make ass
