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

1994 Supreme(Cal) 116

A.K.SENGUPTA
SURENDRA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPN. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.DASH, J.K.MITRA, R.K. KHANNA

AJIT KUMAR SENGUPTA, J.

( 1 ) IN this application under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged the determination of annual value in respect of the premises No. 1 Shakespeare Sarani, Calcutta for the period commencing 4th Quarter 1984-85. The main ground of challenge is that in determining the annual value no reasons have been disclosed by the Authorities as to how the valuation was arrived at.

( 2 ) AT the hearing Mr. Jayanta, Mitra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that there is no basis for determining the annual value at Rupees 29,16,000/- and unless the reasons are disclosed as to why and how the quantum has been arrived at, the petitioner is not in a position to challenge such determination before the Appellate Authority.

( 3 ) IT has been contended by Mr. A. K. Dasadhikari, learned counsel appearing for the Calcutta Municipal Corporation that the Corporation is at liberty to adopt any of the two methods for valuation. In this particular case, the rental method was adopted and according to the particulars furnished the rent including service charge annually came to Rs. 2,70,000. 00 and on that basis the calculation was made an









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