J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition seeking to challenge Ext.P1 revisional proceedings, by which he has been made liable to satisfy luxury tax under the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act , 1975.

2. Heard Sri.Navaneeth N.Nath, the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as Sri.Alan Priyadarshi Dev, the learned Government Pleader.

3. The liability to luxury tax arises only in a situation where the total plinth area of the residential building is in excess of 278.7 square meters. The petitioner has raised a contention to the effect that the proceedings at Ext.P1 were issued, also taking into account the roof area, which is not covered on all sides. In view of the afore contention, I am of the opinion that the matter requires to be reconsidered by the assessing authority. This is especially so, since this Court has already held that the covered roof, which is not covered on the sides, would not be included in the plinth area.

4. In the case at hand, the order at Ext.P1 does