IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
The Manager Vimal Jyothi Engineering College, Kannur – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala Rep. by Secretary, Local Self Government Department – Respondent
W.P. (C) Nos. 17577 of 2010, 24238 of 2011, 1421 of 2013, 9333 of 2014, 10323, 11152 of 2015, 28475 of 2016, 6468 of 2017, 10637, 37453 of 2018, 7493, 11725, 12720, 18185 of 2019
Decided On : 15-11-2019
Kerala Panchayath Raj Act- Section 207(b) -The Kerala Municipality Act- Section 235(b)-The constitutional validity of Section 207(b)-Exemption is given to the institutions, functioning under the administrative control of the Government and to which Governmental auditing of funds and expenditure is made compulsory, whereas, the case of self-financing institutions, such control and auditing of funds are absent-Self-financing Educational Institutions form a separate class, different from the Educational Institutions owned and financed or aided by the Government and the discrimination made under Section 207(b) of the Panchayat Raj Act is marked by intelligible differentia.
Statement of facts:
The petitioners in these writ petitions are self-financing educational institutions. They impugn the demand of property tax from them under Section 203 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act/Section 233 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 [both Acts hereinafter together referred to as the ‘Acts’]. It is stated that as per the said provision, there is a levy of tax contemplated in respect of all buildings, save those that are exempted from the levy of tax under Section 207/Section 235 of the respective Acts. Section 207/Section 235 enumerates the classes of buildings that are exempted from the levy. In these writ petitions, the exemption clause that is challenged as discriminatory is Section 207(b)/Section 235(b) of the Acts.
Finding of the court:
On receiving fresh assessment order and demand notices, the petitioners may, if aggrieved by the computation aspects of the tax, approach the Appellate authorities under the Statute for a redressal of their grievances. Otherwise, the tax and interest shall be paid to the respective Panchayats/Municipalities within a month of service of the demand notices on them- Dismiss the writ petitions in their challenge against the constitutional validity of Section 207(b) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act/Section 235(b) of the Kerala Municipality Act.
Result: Dismissed
JUDGMENT :
A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
1. These writ petitions bring to the fore the general and widespread aversion amongst our citizenry to taxes. Ingenious and varied are the submissions advanced before courts in their attempts to claim the benefit of exemption clauses that would insulate them from a levy. What is missed out often in these desperate attempts, is the general principle in taxation law that exemption provisions in a taxing statute, unlike the charging provisions therein, are interpreted strictly in favour of the revenue and against an assessee. A court hearing arguments challenging the constitutional validity of an exemption provision in a fiscal statute, strives to uphold its validity and it is only if it is impossible to do so that the provision is declared unconstitutional. The burden on those who assail the statutory provision is therefore quite heavy.
2. The petitioners in these writ petitions are self-financing educational institutions. They impugn the demand of property tax from them under Section 203 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act/Section 233 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 [both Acts hereinafter together referred to as the ‘Acts’]. It is stated that as per the said provision, there is a levy of tax contemplated in respect of all buildings, save those that are exempted from the levy of tax under Section 207/Section 235 of the respective Acts. Section 207/Section 235 enumerates the classes of buildings that are exempted from the levy. In these writ petitions, the exemption clause that is challenged as discriminatory is Section 207(b)/Section 235(b) of the Acts, which reads as under:
(a)…..........................
(b) building exclusively used for educational purposes or allied purposes under the ownership of educational institutions owned by the Government, aided or functioning with the financial assistance of the Government and the hostel buildings wherein the students of the said institutions reside.
3. It is the case of the petitioners that inasmuch as their educational institutions are not housed in buildings owned by the Government or aided or functioning under the financial assistance from the Government, they are denied the benefit of the exemption granted under the Acts. They therefore impugn the exemption provision as discriminatory inasmuch as it discriminates between Government/aided educational institutions on the one hand, and unaided educational institutions on the other. It is pointed out that unaided educational institutions were not liable to pay tax under the Act till 7.10.2009, when the exemption provision was amended to exclude the said institutions from the ambit of the exemption. It is also pointed out that some of the educational institutions were established at a time when the buildings were exempted from the levy of property tax under the Acts.
4. Through their counter affidavit filed in these writ petitions, the State Government has justified the classification effected between the two classes of educational institutions in the following manner:
8. Education is the catalytic tool that can transform the future of our children and youth and it plays a predominant role in this modern world. Education serves as the basis of a dignified life and this responsibility is shouldered by the Government in the interests of the larger public. Therein comes the validity of exemption to such institutions owned
Union of India and Others vs. N.S. Rathnam and Sons
Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Limited vs. Union of India
Purshottam Govindji vs. B.N. Desai
Ram Krishna Dalmia vs. Justice S.R. Tendolkar
State of U.P. vs. Deoman Upadhyaya
K.T. Moopil Nair vs. State of Kerala
Khandige Sham Bhat vs. Agricultural I.T.O. AIR 1963 SC 591
State of Gujarat and Another vs. Shri Ambica Mills Ltd. Ahmedabad
V.C. Shukla vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Venkateshwara Theatre vs. State of A.P. (1993) 3 SCC 677
Sreenarayana Gurukulam College of Engineering, Kolenchery vs. State of Kerala and Another
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.