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

1957 Supreme(All) 27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
H. S. Chaturvedi and Randhir Singh, JJ.
UNION OF INDIA - Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL BOARD - Respondents
Civil Ref. 3 Of 1953
Decided On : 01/22/1957

Advocates Appeared:
B.L.Kaul, B.N.MULLA

Property of the Union Government which was liable to tax before the commencement of the Constitution continues to be liable until Parliament provides otherwise.

Headnote:

TAXATION - MUNICIPALITIES - LIABILITY OF UNION GOVERNMENT PROPERTY - PROPERTY VESTED IN UNION GOVERNMENT - EXEMPTION FROM STATE TAXATION - PROPERTY LIABLE TO TAX BEFORE CONSTITUTION - CONTINUES TO BE LIABLE - INCREASE IN TAXES - SANCTION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT - VALIDITY.

Fact of the Case:

The Union Government challenged the liability of its properties in Lucknow to pay house and water taxes to the Municipal Board. The dispute arose during a revision of assessment in 1953, with the Union Government claiming exemption under Article 285 of the Constitution of India.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Union Government's property was liable to pay taxes as it was liable before the commencement of the Constitution and no law had been passed by Parliament to provide otherwise. The court also upheld the increase in taxes sanctioned by the Central Government.

Issues: 1. Whether the Union Government's property was liable to pay house and water taxes to the Municipal Board. 2. Whether the increase in taxes was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Article 285 of the Constitution exempts Union Government property from State taxation, but property liable to tax before the commencement of the Constitution continues to be liable. 2. The Central Government had sanctioned the increase in taxes, which was valid.

Final Decision: The court answered the reference in favor of the Municipal Board, holding that the Union Government's property was liable to pay house and water taxes and that the increase in taxes was valid.

RANDHIR SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) of Lucknow under section 162, U. P. Municipalities Act.

( 2 ) THE Union Government has quite a number of buildings which are in the use of the Northern railway in the City of Lucknow and the Municipal Board of Lucknow used to levy house and water taxes on these buildings. The last revision of assessment was made in the year 1948 and it appears that taxes were paid in respect of these buildings till 31-3-1953. A fresh assessment became due in 1953, and it is in connection with this assessment that a dispute arose between the municipal Board and the Railway Authorities managing the property sought to be assessed, about the liability for payment of tax.

( 3 ) A brief history of the previous revision of assessment made in 1948 may be useful in appreciating the points in dispute. On 1-10-1947, the Municipal Board revised the basis of the assessment of taxes and adopted a system popularly known as slab system of levy of taxes. This was opposed by the Railway Authorities, as it resulted in an increase in the taxes and a reference was made to the District Judge of Lucknow, Dr. L. N, Misra, under Section 131 (2), Railways act, read with Section 3 (2) of the Railways (Local Authorities Taxation) Act (XXV of 1941)and a notification dated 11-1-1944. Dr. L. N. Misra, District Judge of Lucknow, gave his award and approved the basis of taxation under the slab system as proposed by the Municipal Board. No grievance was made thereafter in respect of the payment of taxes which were so assessed under the slab system till 31-3-1953. In the revision of the assessment sought to be made in 1953 which was to be applicable with effect from 1-4-1953, some objection was raised on behalf of the Railway Authorities in charge of the property of the Union. These objections were, however, not accepted by the Assessing Officer and an assessment was made. An appeal was then made to the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) against the order of the Assessing Officer. When the appeal came up for hearing before him, he felt some doubt about certain points and the following points were then referred to this court for decision.

1. Is it open to an assessee, in appeal under Section 160, U. P. Municipalities Act, to challenge an assessment on a ground not raised by way of objection under Section 143 (2) of the Act, as in this case, where it was not alleged in the objections that building No. 3 had been let out, and it is only now alleged in para. 4 of the grounds of appeal that the building in question should have been assessed under Section 140 (1) (b) on rental basis?

2. In view of the deletion of the provision for allowing depreciation in the Act of 1900, from the provisions of the present Act, is it permissible to allow depreciation in assessing the present cost of erecting the building within the meaning of Section 1. 40 (1) (a) of the Municipalities Act?

3. Is the Union Government through the Northern Railway liable to pay house and water taxes to the Lucknow Municipality?

( 4 ) IF so, is it liable only in respect of those buildings which existed on 26-1-1950, when the constitution of India came into force," and in respect of which the Central Government through the Railway Administration of the E. I. Railway was liable or was treated as liable on that crucial date?

( 5 ) IF the Union Government through the Northern Railway is held to be liable to pay house and water taxes to the Lucknow Municipality is it so liable to pay them at the rate imposed or in force on 26-1-1950, or also to any enhanced rates that may have come into force at a later date? these points have to be dealt with separately.

4. Point No. 1.--It has been argued on behalf of the assessee Union Government that this point ought not to have been referred for decision to this Court and reliance was placed on the provisions of Section 162, U. P. Municipalities Act. The relevant Part of Section 162 is















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 Back to top