The court mandates reassessment under Section 7 of the Kerala Building Tax Act due to disputed plinth area measurements.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge the demand of luxury tax under the provisions of Section 5A of the Kerala Building Tax Act , 1975 (for short “the Act”) as confirmed in an appeal by the appellate authority as evidenced by Ext.P4. The petitioner has also sought to challenge the levy of building tax with reference to the very same property pursuant to an dated dated 13.02.2013.

2. Heard Sri.Abraham George Jacob, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the Sri.Alan Priyadarshi Dev, the learned Government Pleader.

3. The dispute in this writ petition essentially appears to be the dispute as regards the total plinth area of the residential building. According to the petitioner, the plinth area would be 109 square meters, as against which the order at Ext.P4 dated 21.08.2020 speaks about the total plinth area at 285.32 square meters.

4. The learned Government Pleader states that the order at Ext.P4 has arrived at the afore plinth area on the basis of a report obtained through the Senior Superintendent of the Revenue Department. However, the learned counsel pointed out, quite rightly, that the report has been prepared, without notice and opportunity to the petitioner herein. This Court further notices that the order at Ext.P4 has been confirmed in further revision by Ext.P6.

5. I am of the opinion that, insofar as the dispute is essentially as regards the plinth area of the building in question, the same can be resolved by carrying out the measurement, with specific notice and opportunity to the petitioner herein, as has been specifically laid down with reference to the provisions of Section 7 of the Act.

6. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the matter requires a reconsideration, essentially with reference to the imposition of luxury tax as well as one time building tax.

7. So as to facilitate the above, the orders at Exts.P4, P6 and P7 would stand set aside. If the petitioner has already been assessed to building tax on the afore plinth area as referred to in Ext.P4 proceedings, the Tahsildar to reconsider the assessment to building tax afresh in view of the orders imposing luxury tax being set aside as above.

Therefore, this writ petition would stand allowed, directing the 4^th respondent herein to pass fresh orders as directed above, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-