The court emphasized that mechanical assessment orders violating natural justice can be set aside, allowing for fresh consideration of the case.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the Managing Director of a company which is involved in construction of residential apartments. He constructed a building by the name 'Galaxy Bridgewood' at Elamkulam, Ernakulam, consisting of 110 apartments. Petitioner claims that each of those apartments are separate units required to be assessed separately. According to the petitioner, even though a return was filed under the Kerala Building Tax Act , 1975 (for short, the Act), the assessing officer without complying with the provisions of law and in violation of the principles of natural justice issued Ext.P4 order assessing the petitioner to a building tax of Rs.39,08,160/- as one time building tax. The said order is under challenge in this writ petition.

2. I have heard Sri.Manoj Ramaswamy, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt.Jasmine M.M., the learned Government Pleader.

3. Normally, the remedy of a person aggrieved by an order of assessment under the Act is to prefer an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer. However, when there is violation of the principles of natural justice, this Court would be justified in interfering with orders of assessment, despite the existence of such appellate remedies.

4. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the assessing officer has passed Ext.P4 mechanically, without referring to any of the circumstances that can have a bearing on the assessment. The provisions of the statute under Explanation (2) to Section 2 (e) of the Act has not even been referred for consideration. Petitioner has raised a contention that he is entitled to have the different apartments assessed separately, being separate units, in view of the legal and factual circumstances arising in the case. There is however no such consideration of the aforesaid aspects and the impugned order has been issued mechanically without any reason whatsoever. In such circumstances, I am satisfied that relegating the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy would befall manifest injustice. Hence, this is a fit case where the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be exercised.

Accordingly, Ext.P4 order dated 12.01.2024 issued by the 4 th respondent is hereby set aside. The 4 th respondent shall consider the matter afresh, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after verifying the relevant records in accordance with law, bearing in mind the legal propositions laid down by this Court in the various decisions.

The writ petition is allowed as above.