The assessing authority is not bound to refer the question of exemption to the Government after the completion of assessment under the Kerala Building Tax Act.

1. Petitioner was assessed to tax under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (the Act, for brevity) in respect of a building constructed by a congregation, of which she is the Mother Superior. The notice of demand served on her is Ext. P3 After receipt of the order of assessment and the notice of demand, petitioner submitted a return along with a covering letter Ext. P1 stating that the building in question is one used principally for religious and charitable purposes and hence exempt under S.3(1)(b) of the Act. She prayed therefore that the "proceedings" may be dropped. This was met with a reply Ext. P2 from the assessing authority, namely the Tahsildar-respondent, that if the petitioner had any objection to the assessment, she may file an appeal to the appellate authority as provided in S.11 of the Act. Petitioner challenges Exts. P2 and P3 on the ground that the building is one used principally for religious and charitable purposes and hence exempt under S.3(1)(b). She contends that the only authority vested with the jurisdiction to decide this question was Government under S.3(2), and hence the respondent should have referred the question to Government, for its decision.

2. Respondent has filed a counter affidavit which gives in detail, a tale of laches on the part of the petitioner. The respondent points out that the petitioner did not file any return after the construction of the building was completed, as required in S.7(1) of the Act. Therefore, the respondent issued a notice dated March 20, 1978 and served it on the petitioner on March 22, 1978 calling upon her to submit a return under S.7(3). Petitioner did not however comply with the notice and file any return. The respondent therefore, proceeded with the matter and issued a notice under S.9(4) dated February 29, 1980, to appear for a hearing on March 5,1980. This notice was served on the petitioner on March 1, 1980. But the petitioner did not appear. The respondent thereafter made detailed enquiries and completed the assessment under S.9(5) to the best of his judgment, and served it on the petitioner on May 14,1984. Even this did not move the petitioner. The demand notice under S.10 of the Act, that is Ext. P3, was thereafter served on the petitioner on June 12, 1984. It was then that the petitioner came up with the letter Ext. P1, enclosing a return.

3. Petitioner's main contention is that when she raised the question of exemption under S.3(1)(b) by the letter Ext P1, it was incumbent on the respondent, assessing authority, to refer the question to Government under S.3(2) of the Act. Failure to do so, it is stated, vitiates the order of assessment, and the demand.

4. The scheme of the Act so far as it relates to assessment, and the appellate/revisional remedies, is, in brief as follows. The owner of a building, the construction of which is completed after April 1, 1973 and the estimated capital value of which is more Rs.75,000/- is bound to submit voluntarily a return in the prescribed form to the assessing authority. The assessing authority is also given the power to call upon any person to submit a return if he is of opinion that such person was liable to furnish a return. The assessment. is made by the assessing authority appointed under S.4. The assessing authority may make the assessment, either accepting the return, or to the best of his judgment, as specified in S.9. The question whether the building is exempt from the levy under the Act is however beyond the purview of the assessing authority, by virtue of the operation of sub-s. (2) of S.3. Thereunder, if any question arises as to whether a building is exempt under sub-s. (1) of S.3, it shall be referred to the Government, and the Government shall decide this question after giving the interested parties an opportunity to present their case. The decision of Government is declared to be final and not liable to be called in question is any court of law, by sub-clause (3) of S.3.

5. When an assessment is