When court will quash show cause notice against assessee on ground of delay?

In this court's view, therefore, since Vodafone Essar (supra) considered the entire issue and noted that even recently a reasonable period was read into the Act, in relation to exercise of powers (although in a different context) accepting the petitioner's contention in the present case is based on precedent. Furthermore, the only reason cited by the respondent, i.e. administrative convenience, cannot outweigh the harsh nature of the consequence, which would expose resident payers to the onerous responsibility of maintaining books and documents for an uncertain period of time. Given these considerations, the impugned notices are quashed. 
In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

(Before S. Ravindra Bhat and Deepa Sharma, JJ.)

Bharti Airtel Ltd. and Anr

v.

UOI and Anr

W.P. (C) 2166/2012

Decided on December 19, 2016

Citation: 2016 SCC OnLine Del 6338

Print Page

Whether rateable value for payment of property tax can be fixed for self occupied premises?

In the case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v/s. Kamla Mills Ltd., (2003) 6 SCC 315, the Supreme Court did not accept the contention of the assessee in that case that no rateable value can be fixed in respect of the premises occupied by the owner himself. The Court observed that the ratable value had to be determined on the basis of what an hypothetical tenant would offer as reasonable rent.

Bombay High Court

Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal ... vs Tata Engineering And Locomotive ... on 11 August, 2009

Bench: Nishita Mhatre

Citation:2009(5) ALLMR 529:2009(5)MHLJ647 Bom

Read full judgment here:click here

Print Page

Whether burden to show that fixation of rateable value by commissioner is unreasonable is on assessee?

In the result, though we accept the proposition urged by the respondent that in the facts of the present case the standard rent would be the limit of the rateable value, we find that there was no material produced on record at any stage by the respondent to show what the standard rent was either in respect of the vacant land or in respect of the land on which the building was constructed and demolished, or in respect of the building after it was constructed. We accept the contention of the appellant that the hurden of proving this fact, while objecting to the rateable value fixed by the Commissioner, is always on the respondent-assessee. We also accept the contention of the appellant that the respondent was less than fair to the appellant in not disclosing that its property had been occupied by National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. and National Security Depository Ltd. and in not disclosing the amounts paid by them. The respondent ought to have disclosed the fact, fairly and fully, and urged the legal contentions open to it based thereupon. These facts would have justified our allowing the appeal fully and restoring the assessment orders made by the appellant officers. However, we are not inclined to do so for the reason that the attention of the parties has not been focused on the core issue, as a result of which, perhaps, there was failure to produce relevant material before the assessor to show what was the standard rent. The interests of justice would require that the issue be reconsidered after giving an opportunity to the respondent to discharge the burden placed upon it under law.

Supreme Court of India

Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... vs Kamla Mills Ltd on 11 July, 2003

Bench: Ruma Pal, B.N. Srikrishna

           CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil)  2452 of 2000

Citation:2003 AIR SCW3399:2003(5)Scale237:

2003(4) supreme 530

Print Page

When assessee is not entitled to get deduction in respect of donation made by him to charitable trust?

 Disallowance of donation to Aparna
Ashram:
Disallowance of donation made to
Aparna Ashram by the assessee was refused
by the Primary and First Appellate
Authority on the ground that the necessary
certificate showing that the donee (Aparna
Ashram) had complied with the conditions
subject to which registration was granted
to it under Section 35(2A) of the Act was
not produced by the assessee so as to
entitle it to the claim of deduction of
the donation made. The learned ITAT took
the view that the aforesaid conditions
were not material. The High Court on due
consideration found that the said
conditions were necessary preconditions to
the grant of statutory registration and
had to be satisfied. There is no dispute
on the fact that no such certificate had
been furnished by the assessee and also
that all Authorities have consistently
held that if and when such certificate is
produced the consequential benefit can be
afforded to the assessee. In the aforesaid
circumstances, we do not see how the view
taken by the High Court that the assessee
was not entitled to the benefit of
donation made to Aparna Ashram can be
faulted.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.1964 OF 2008
M/S GANAPATHY & CO.,
BANGALORE ...APPELLANT
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX
BANGALORE ...RESPONDENT
Citation; AIR 2016 SC 422

Print Page

What remedy is available to assessee who is affected by tax imposed by municipal council?

 We take up the first preliminary question for
consideration, namely availability of alternate efficacious remedy,
as contended by learned counsel for the respondent no.2. It is
true that Section 169 of the Municipal Act provides for an appeal
to the Magistrates or Committee. The question, however, relates
to the applicability of Section 49A of the Act in the matter of
engagement of an agency for carrying out the duties in the matter
of assessment of taxes, and preparation and finalization of
assessment list, which question cannot be gone into in the said
appeal. The further question is about violation of various
provisions of the Act as projected before us by the petitioners, on
the ground that the action impugned in the Writ Petition violates
the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article
14 of the Constitution of India. There is a further question also
whether the Appellate Court or the Committee would be able to
consider the matters raised in the instant petition. We do not wish

to undertake a deeper exercise, since the said question has been
decided by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in the case of
New Manek Chowk Spinning & Weaving Mills Co., Ltd. [cited
supra]. In our opinion, it would be sufficient if we quote
paragraph 14 and extracted portion of para 16 from the said
judgment, which read as under:-
“14. Mr. Setalvad argued that at that stage
there is only a proposal and even if the municipality
had acted arbitrarily it was open to the assessees to
take objection thereto and have proper valuations
made and the assessment book prepared properly.
We cannot accept this argument. If the
municipality fails in its initial duty to act in terms of
R. 9 (b) it does not lie in its mouth to say that any
irregularity, however, patent on the face of it, is
open to correction. Moreover, the methods of
correction in this regard are really illusory. The
Small Causes Court cannot decide the applicability
of Art. 14 of the Constitution and according to the
judgment of the Bombay High Court in Balkrishna v.
Poona Municipal Corporation (1963) 65 Bom LR
119, (by which the District Judge would be bound):
“.....the words used in S. 406 (1) of the Act..... do
not cover the vires of the tax or the legality of the
tax which is sought to be levied.”
Earlier, the learned Judges had pointed out after
noting Ss 406 to 413 that :
“the decision of Judge aforesaid upon any appeal
against any such value or tax if no appeal is made
therefrom under S. 411 and if such appeal is made

the decision of the District Court in such appeal
shall be final.”
From this it follows that it would be useless for the
assessee to take objections or file appeals against
the decision on rateable value to the authorities
prescribed by the Act if he was challenging the
determination of the rateable value as being
violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution. It is no
answer to such a charge to say that the rateable
value could be determined properly by the
municipal authorities acting under the Act and the
rules thereunder when they do not resort to any of
the well-known methods of valuation and cannot
justify their arbitrary method.”
“16. The net result of all this is that unless the
assessee pays the amount of tax demanded, his
appeal cannot be heard so that if he questions the
rateable value or the levy of the tax, he must in
any event, deposit the amount demanded. In
effect, the Act and the appeal rules do not make
any provision for relief to an assessee who
complains that the assessment book has been
prepared in violation of the law. .....”
 Article 265 of the Constitution reads thus:-
“265. Taxes not to be imposed save by authority
of law.- No tax shall be levied or collected except by
authority of law.”
As held in the case of Municipal Council, Khurai & another Vs.
Kamal Kumar & another [1965 Mh.L.J. 225], we find that the
procedure for imposing the liability to pay a tax has to be strictly

complied with. Where it is not so complied with, the liability to pay
the tax cannot be said to be according to law. That apart, reading
of the appellate provision under Section 169 of the Act, to our
mind, does not at all encompass the legal challenges raised in the
instant Writ Petition, on the ground that the action impugned is
contrary to the various provisions of the Act and that the same is
also in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.2585 of 2013

 Sandeep Inderchand Gandhi Vs   The State of Maharashtra,

CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI AND
P.R. BORA, JJ.

Pronounced on : 12th Dec., 2014.
 [Per A.B. Chaudhari,J.]:
Citation;2015(2) ALLMR628

Print Page