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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 7070

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Shail Jain, JJ
LIBRA BUILDWELL LLP – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR. – Respondent
W.P.(C) 3264/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Diya Kapur, Mr. Raghav Kumar, Mr. Aditya Ladha
For the Respondents: Mr. Tushar Sannu, Mr. Fajallu Rehman, Ms. Pulak Gupta

The court found that adjustments under the amnesty scheme depend strictly on compliance with its terms, and payments made during litigation are subject to those stipulations.

Headnote:(A) Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2003 - Section 123D - Challenges to property tax demand raised by Municipal Corporation - The petition contests a tax demand seeking payment of dues based on a new assessment method, tied to the one-time property tax amnesty scheme SUNIYO, effective from 01.06.2025 to 30.09.2026. The petitioners seek to avail benefits under this scheme including waiver of previous dues upon compliance. (Para 6)

(B) Amnesty Scheme - The court outlined that benefits of the scheme are bound to the terms laid out within it, and judicial intervention in policy matters such as amnesty schemes is limited. The scheme presents an opportunity for settling ongoing disputes and obtaining waivers on outstanding debts related to property tax. The court upheld that amounts deposited during litigation must comply with the stipulations set forth by the scheme. (Paras 17, 18)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges a significant property tax demand calculated at over Rs. 1.17 crore by the MCD, stemming from an assessment under the DMC Act, backed by a new amnesty scheme. The petitioner seeks adjustment of payments made previously under the scheme's favorable terms. (Paras 3, 10)

Findings of Court:
Amount paid under interim relief could be adjusted as per the scheme's provisions, whereas earlier payments not categorized as 'settled' cannot be counted. Additionally, the court emphasized that adjustments and deductions must adhere strictly to the scheme's guidelines. (Paras 16, 24)

Issues: The key legal issue concerns the proper interpretation of the SUNIYO scheme's terms related to property tax and whether amounts paid during litigation can be adjusted according to the benefits offered under this policy intervention. (Paras 8, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the scheme explicitly permits adjustments only for amounts that have not been previously settled, and held that payments made absent a settlement do not qualify for benefits under the scheme. (Paras 19, 20)

Result: The petition is disposed of with directions on the adjustment of payments relating to the property tax dispute.

Table of Content
1. introduction of property tax dispute and amnesty scheme. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. challenge to property tax demand (Para 7)
3. arguments regarding payment adjustments and implications of the amnesty scheme. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 18)
4. court's observations on scheme provisions and necessity of withdrawals. (Para 13 , 19 , 20)
5. court's view on the operation of the suniyo scheme (Para 16)
6. final decision details regarding adjustment policies. (Para 22 , 26)
7. disposal of the petition and terms of adjustment (Para 25)

2. The Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the various demands raised by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter, ‘MCD’) towards property tax in respect of the Farmhouse No. 2 [Mustatil No. 56, Kh. Nos. 56/11/1, 11/2, 20/3, 57/14, 15, 26] situated in Village Deramandi, New Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the farmhouse’).

3. The demand raised in terms of the demand notice dated 27th September, 2023 was to the tune of Rs. 1,17,73,465/- which includes the principal amount of Rs.86,09,172/- and an interest amount of Rs.49,55,446/-.

4. The demand was based on an assessment carried out by the MCD under Section 123D of the Delhi Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 2003.

5. The legal issue that has been raised in this matter is with respect to the manner in which the property tax is to be determined, based upon the vacant land in farm houses. This issue is pending in a batch of writ petitions before this Court, including the present case, where submissions have already been heard in part.

6. In the meantime, the MCD has launched a one-time property tax amnesty scheme known as “Sumpattikar Niptaan Yojana” (hereinafter, SUNIYO scheme) on 2nd June, 2025. The salient features of the said scheme are as under:

(a) On Payment of Principal amount of property tax for the current year 2025-26 & previous five (5) years (i.e. FY 2025-26 + FYs 2020-21 to 2024-25), all the previous dues prior to the FY 2020-21 including interest and penalty will stand waived off.

(b) The taxpayer has to file online PTR by accessing the link for the purpose at https://mcdonline.nic.in/ptrmcd/web/citizen/info

(c) The owners/occupiers having multiple UPIC numbers for the same property may get their multiple UPIC numbers merged by accessing the aforesaid link.

(d) There shall be a helpline number +91-7065064988 in MCD to facilitate the taxpayers.

(e) Taxpayer shall have to upload the proof of previous payment receipts for the period from FY 2020-21, if any, along with other documents. In order to facilitate the taxpayers, MCD is publishing the details of property tax paid in public domain.

(f) On successful submission of an application and payment of dues under the scheme, a tax receipt will get auto generated indicating the payment made and will be available to the tax payer for download.

(g) In case of Government & Railway Properties (GRP), PSU/Autonomous bodies etc. who wish to avail the benefits of the Scheme, payment shall be accepted through online mode like RTGS/NEFT as well as through demand draft. The demand draft shall be in favour of "Commissioner, MCD" payable at New Delhi. The payment for depositing the property tax for other categories, except Government & Railway Properties (GRP), PSU/Autonomous bodies etc. shall be through online mode only.

(h) The taxpayers, whose case(s) are pending under litigation in any court i.e. Municipal Taxation Tribunal/District Court/High Court/Supreme Court etc., and want to avail benefits of this scheme, have to file a written undertaking (Specimen is at Annex-A) that the taxpayer will withdraw the court case pending in any court and shall agree to the terms and conditions of the SUNIYO 2025-26 Scheme.

(i) The taxpayers may rectify their wrong SAPTR within two months or upto the closure of the Scheme, whichever is earlier, without any interest & penalty.

(j) The department will carry out scrutiny from 01-04-2026 to 31-03-2027 of the SAPTRs filed under the scheme and if there is any underpayment, th

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