SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Ker) 1359

Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Manuel Kachiramattam & Merry George
For the Respondent: Sayd M Thangal (Sr. Government Pleader)

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner and the 6th respondent are the co-owners of the residential building bearing No.4/85 of Marangattupally Grama Panchayat. By Ext.P1, issued under the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, (for short, ‘the Act’) luxury tax was demanded from the petitioner with respect to a residential building constructed by him. Though, an appeal was presented, pointing out that a shed behind the residential house and the truss work area in the terrace of the building ought not to have been taken into account for the purpose of imposition of luxury tax, by Ext.P3 order issued by the 3rd respondent, it was found that as regards the truss work area on the terrace portion, the petitioner has liability to pay tax and as regards the out house behind the residential house, the same need not be taken into account for the purpose of imposition of luxury tax.

2. Against Ext.P1, the petitioner preferred a revision petition under Section 9 of the Act before the 2nd respondent, District Collector. Pending the above revision petition, the appellate order at Ext.P3 stood implemented by Ext.P8 order dated 22.06.2016 by reducing the plinth area of the house, for the purpose of imp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top