IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 828 of 2025 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 828 of 2025 ==========================================================

THE BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED Versus RAJKOT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ( RAJKOT MAHANAGAR SEVA SADAN )

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR AJAY R MEHTA(453) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA Date : 17/03/2025

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)

Order in First Appeal Mr.Ajay Mehta, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the issue, is no longer res integra in principle, inasmuch as, the co-ordinate bench of this Court in the case of Sushilaben Veljibhai Shah vs. Jamnagar Municipal Corporation in Special Civil Application No. 8323 of 2019 has held and observed that it would be impermissible for the corporation to levy tax with retrospective effect. In the case on hand, the notice dated 07.01.2009, was issued for financial year 2008-2009 wherein the arrears were of Rs.1,723/-and the current tax assessed was Rs.1,668/-. The total property tax levied was Rs. 3,395/-. Thereafter, once again, for the financial year 2012-2013 the bill issued for an amount of Rs.8336.00/-. To the surprise of the appellant, notice has been issued dated 13.11.2013 requiring the appellant to deposit the tax with effect from 01.05.1984, for which, there is no basis. The tax thereafter assessed was for an amount of Rs.80,21,012/-. It is submitted that the issue is well settled that the Corporation cannot levy tax with retrospective effect and disregarding the judgment and the principle, that the appeal has been dismissed by the learned Judge on the ground that the judgments would not apply. It is submitted that out of the total amount of Rs.80,21,012/-, the appellant has already deposited 75% which would be to an extent of Rs.61,15334/-.

2. Heard Mr.Ajay Mehta, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant. 3. ADMIT.

Order in Civil Application Issue Rule returnable on 28.03.2025.

2. In the case of Sushilaben Veljibhai Shah vs. Jamnagar Municipal Corporation in Special Civil Application No. 8323 of 2019 the Division Bench while considering the provisions of Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 has held and observed that the Corporation could not have raised a demand with retrospective effect. In the said case the demand was made for the period from 1993 to 2006 in the year 2015.

Paragraphs 6.2, 6.3 and 7 read thus:

“6.2. In view of the above provisions of the Act and Rules, which provides for assessment of the property tax, it is apparent that the respondent Corporation could not have raised a demand for the period from 1993 to 2006 in the year 2015. The submissions made on behalf of the respondent Corporation that the Corporation was kept in dark about the additional construction raised on the land in question, and therefore, no assessment could be made with regard to the property in question, resulting into non-assessment is also without any basis, because there is nothing on record to show in which year such additional construction was done nor the Corporation has specified the nature of such additional construction and whether the same if at all would be taxable for more than 13 years and raising such demand after 9 years. As the respondent No.1 Corporation has admitted the fact that the measurement was carried out on 27.02.2003 recording the construction of 442.50 sq. mtrs., but no assessment was made on the basis of actual construction on the property since then. Assuming that Rule 21A of Chapter-VIII of the Rules provides that, in the event of the owner having failed to give notice to the Corporation about additional construction, the Commissioner may re-fix the ratable value and assess the property on such ad