The exemption under the Kerala Building Tax Act applies regardless of whether the property is rented out, as long as it is used for industrial purposes.

JUDGMENT :

S.MANU, J.

Petitioner has constructed two buildings in the land allotted by the Government of Kerala at Ankamaly. The buildings were designed and constructed with 40 modules for industrial units engaged in manufacturing of products and ancillary services. Some of the modules of the buildings were leased out to industrial units engaged in manufacturing products.

2. The Tahsildar, Aluva issued assessment orders under the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act. When the petitioner received assessment order with respect to the first building constructed, petitioner approached the District Collector under Section 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act invoking the revisional jurisdiction. The Collector made a reference to the Government and Ext.P3 communication was issued by the Government thereafter. Government after considering the matter, issued Ext.P6 order dated 22.04.2014.

3. A reading of Ext.P6 shows that the Government was of the view that the petitioner had constructed buildings in Government property and was renting out the buildings to others. The concerned authority observed that exemption under Section 3(1)(b) is not available to buildings rented out. Further it was observed that the petitioner in its capacity as the owner of the building was not directly running any industry or factory. According to the Government as far as the petitioner is concerned, the building was utilised for renting out and not for conducting any industry or factory. Stating the said reason, the Government decided that the petitioner is not entitled for the exemption under Section 3(1)(b).

4. Petitioner approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P6 order issued by the Government. Petitioner sought for quashing the assessment order as well as the order issued by the Government. When W.P.(C) No.22542 of 2014 was pending, the Tahsildar concerned issued assessment orders with respect to the second building constructed by the petitioner in the same property. Petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.5653 of 2017 challenging the assessment orders issued with respect to the second building.

Government filed separate counter affidavits in both cases.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner referring to Section 3(1)(b) of the Kerala Building Tax Act submitted that buildings used principally for religious, charitable or educational purposes or as factories or workshops(or cattle/pig/poultry farms or poly houses) are exempted from the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act. He submitted that buildings constructed by the petitioner are used principally as factories. He hence contended that the buildings of the petitioner are exempted under Section 3(1)(b). The learned counsel argued that the provisions of Section 3(1)(b) do not make any distinction between buildings put in own use by the owner of the building and those which are rented out. The learned counsel therefore contended that the distinction made by the Government in Ext.P6 order is not legally sustainable. The learned counsel placed reliance on a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Biju M.K v. State of Kerala [2017 (1) KLT 991]. The learned counsel pointed out that identical issue was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in the said judgment. The Division Bench observed that there was no indication in the provision of Section 3(1)(b) as to the need or requirement that the owner should be the user to claim the exemption. The learned counsel submitted that the decision taken by the Government reflected in Ext.P6 is not legally sustainable and the petitioner is entitled for exemption.

6. The learned Government Pleader on the other hand