Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
MALLIKA PURUSHOTHAMAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges validity of tax demands under statutory limitations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court finds merit in petitioner's claims based on prior rulings. (Para 3) |
| 3. court quashes tax demands, requiring reassessment. (Para 4) |
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the co-owner of the room bearing No.
36/4227(0ld No.25-846-3) in the territorial jurisdiction of Thrissur Corporation. The grievance highlighted by the petitioner in this writ petition is against Exts.P5 and P6 demand notices, requiring the petitioner to pay property tax in respect of the building for the financial years from 2016-2017 to 2025- 2026. The challenge raised by the petitioner is mainly on the ground that, the demand is hit by the period of limitation contemplated under Sec.539 of the Kerala Municipality Act . 2. Apart from the above, it is contended that the rate of tax is also disputed in view of the fact that, this Court has already found in Ext.P2 judgment that, the Thrissur Corporation revised the rates of tax without following the procedures contemplated under the and the Rules framed thereunder. Thus, the revision of the tax, as such, was set aside, with a direction to Corporation to carry
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
