Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B. PUGALENDHI, J.
V. Sundhar – Petitioner
Versus
The Kumbakonam City Municipal Corporation and Another – Respondents
W.P. (MD) Nos. 7087 to 7089 of 2024, W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 6549, 6550, 6579, 6584, 6590, 6593 of 2024
Decided On : 26-03-2024
Property Tax - Assessment Dispute - Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920 - Rules 7 to 10 of Schedule IV
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner acquired the property in 2004 and has been paying property tax for Assessment No. 105/018/900903. The respondent issued demand notices for property tax for three portions of the building from different years without providing an opportunity of hearing.
Finding of the Court:
The court set aside the demand notices and directed the respondents to conduct an enquiry, provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and assess the property tax afresh for the relevant assessment numbers.
Issues: Dispute over property tax assessment, lack of opportunity of hearing, and validity of demand notices.
Ratio Decidendi: The impugned demand notices were set aside due to the absence of an opportunity of hearing, as required by Rules 7 to 10 of Schedule IV of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920.
Final Decision: The writ petition is allowed, and the respondents are directed to conduct an enquiry, provide an opportunity of hearing, and assess the property tax afresh for the relevant assessment numbers.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the impugned demand notice dated 21.02.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent in respect of assessment No. 105/018/900903, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation demanding property tax from 2019-2020 and quash the same.
In W.P. (MD) No. 7088 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the impugned demand notice dated 21.02.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent in respect of assessment No. 105/018/901424, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation demanding property tax from 1990-1991 and quash the same.
In W.P. (MD) No. 7089 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the impugned demand notice dated 21.02.2024 on the file of the 2nd respondent in respect of assessment No. 105/018/901423, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation demanding property tax from 1988-1989 and quash the same.
1. W.P. (MD) No. 7087 of 2024 has been filed as against the notice dated 21.02.2024 in respect of Assessment No. 105/018/900903, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation, demanding property tax from 2019-2020.
2. W.P. (MD) No. 7088 of 2024 has been filed as against the notice dated 21.02.2024 in respect of Assessment No. 105/018/901424, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation, demanding property tax from 1990-1991.
3. W.P. (MD) No. 7089 of 2024 has been filed as against the notice dated 21.02.2024 in respect of Assessment No. 105/018/901423, in Ward No. 18 of Kumbakonam Municipal Corporation, demanding property tax from 1988-1989.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner has obtained this property by way of settlement only in the year 2004. However, the second respondent has issued three impugned demand notices dated 21.02.2024 for Assessment Nos. 105/018/900903, 105/018/901424, 105/018/901423. He further submits that with regard to the Assessment No. 105/018/900903, the second respondent has demanded the property tax from the year 2019-2020 to 2023-2024 and for the Assessment No. 105/018/901424, demanded the property tax from the year 1990-1991 to 2023-2024 and for the Assessment No. 105/018/901423, the second respondent has demanded the property tax from the year 1988-1989 to 2023-2024. According to him, for the Assessment No. 105/108/900903, the petitioner has already paid the property tax till date. With regard to other two assessment numbers, the property tax has been demanded from the year 1990-91 and 1988-89 till date, for which period, the petitioner was not in possession of that property.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the demand raised after a period of 12 years is barred as per Section 482 of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act. He further submits that the impugned demand notices have been issued without providing an opportunity of hearing.
6. Mr. Panneer Selvam, learned counsel for the respondent Corporation submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved over the impugned demand notices, he is having a remedy under Section 100 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act before the Tax Appellate Committee.
7. This Court considered the rival submissions made.
8. The petitioner claims that he has obtained this property by way of settlement only in the year 2004. He further claims that this property is a single building and all along, he has been paying the property tax in Assessment No. 105/018/900903 till date. But, the second respondent has issued the impugned notices dated 21.02.2024 demanding the property tax for three portions of building in three assessment numbers, from the years 2019-2020, 1990-91 and 1988-89 respectively. It appears that in
The requirement to provide an opportunity of hearing before passing provisional orders of assessment, as mandated by Rules 7 to 10 of Schedule IV of the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920.
Property tax assessments must follow Section 82 procedure including objections hearing; non-compliance renders notice invalid.
Property tax assessment demands must comply with natural justice requirements, including providing an opportunity to be heard; such notices should be treated as provisional until the taxpayer is give....
Civil court decree mandating show cause notice and reassessment binds municipal corporation despite later statutory bars.
When a property tax demand notice is issued without proper assessment or opportunity to be heard, the court may remit the matter to the authority for a fresh assessment subject to the payment of a po....
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
