Back
Judges : M.P.MENON
M.MATHEW - Appellant
Versus
EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Respondent
Case No : O. P. No. 2548 of 1981
Decided On : 01/16/1984
Advocates Appeared :
Siby Mathew; A.A. Mohammed Nazir; M.C. Mathew; For Petitioner M.N. Sukumaran Nair; Government Pleader; For Respondents
Building Tax Exemption - Educational Purposes - The court held that buildings used for educational purposes are exempt from building tax under S.72(1)(d) of the Kerala Panchayats Act. The user of the building for educational purposes determines eligibility for exemption, and the receipt of rent by the owner is not a relevant consideration.
Fact of the Case:
The court considered the interpretation of S.72(1)(d) of the Kerala Panchayats Act, which exempts buildings used for educational purposes from building tax. The respondent's view that only the owner's use of the building is exempted, and not the tenant's use, was also examined.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the user of the building for educational purposes, not the receipt of rent by the owner, determines eligibility for exemption from building tax. The court also emphasized that practical difficulties are not a reason to misinterpret the statute, and if the provision creates hardship, the competent authority should amend it.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of S.72(1)(d) of the Kerala Panchayats Act and whether buildings used for educational purposes are exempt from building tax regardless of the owner or tenant's use.
Ratio Decidendi: The key legal principle established is that the user of the building for educational purposes determines eligibility for exemption from building tax under S.72(1)(d) of the Kerala Panchayats Act, and practical difficulties are not a valid reason to misinterpret the statute.
Final Decision: The court quashed Exts. P1 to P4 and ordered the refund of the amount deposited by the petitioner for filing an appeal. The decision was allowed with no costs.
1. Under S.72(1)(d) of the Kerala Panchayats Act, "buildings used for educational purposes" are exempt from building tax. What matters is the user of the building; if it is needed for educational purposes; it is eligible for exemption:
2. The view taken by the respondent that user by the owner of the building is alone exempted, and not user by a tenant, is not supported by the language of the statute. Receipt of rent by the owner is not a relevant consideration; even hostels which normally charge rent are specifically exempted by the same clause.
3. Counsel for the Panchayat would point out that this view will place all parallel colleges and tutorial colleges outside the purview of the levy.
Practical difficulties are no reason to misinterpret the statute. If the provision yields only to one construction and that creates hardship, the proper course is for the competent authority to amend it.
4. Exts. P1 to P4 will stand quashed. The amount deposited by the petitioner for the purpose of filing appeal will be refunded to him. Allowed as above. No costs.
Allowed.
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
