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

2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 381

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J
MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

Petitioner challenges Ext.P14 by which the District Collector in his revisional jurisdiction had confirmed the order passed by the assessing authority under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), while petitioner's building has been assessed to building tax as well as luxury tax.

2. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that the District Collector, while passing Ext.P14 order, referred to a circular issued by the Government on 18/05/2013 by which direction was issued to exclude only one car porch. This, according to the petitioner, is absolutely baseless. Petitioner's contention is that the building is having only a total plinth area of 275.72 sq.meters which will not attract luxury tax under Section 5A of the Act whereas the measurement taken by the respondent authorities is absolutely baseless.

3. Ext.P4 is the assessment order by which the assessing authority had computed the plinth area of the building at 293.37 sq.meters and the petitioner had been called upon to remit the building tax of Rs.5,400/-. In addition to that, petitioner was asked to pay luxury tax of Rs.2,000/- each for the period 2012- 2013. The matter wa

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top