S.S.Radhakrishnan v. The Assistant Revenue Officer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATE : 26.08.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR W.P.NO.17801 OF 2021 & W.M.P.NO.18986 OF 2021 Shri.S.S.Radhakrishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Assistant Revenue Officer Zone XIII (Adyar) Greater Chennai Corporation No.115, Muthulakshmi Salai Adyar, Chennai - 600 020 ... Respondent Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated June 23, 2021 in Ma.Aa.13.Va.Thu,Na.Ka.No.R2/1268/2021 passed by the Respondent and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr.Mohammed Shaffiq for Mr.G.Derrick Sam For Respondent : Ms.S.Vaitheeswari Standing counsel for Chennai Corporation

ORDER

Mr.Mohammed Shaffiq, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr.G.Derric Sam, counsel on record for writ petitioner and Ms.S.Vaitheeswari, learned Standing Counsel for Chennai corporation (on behalf of lone respondent) are before this Virtual Court, with the consent of both the learned counsel, main writ petition is taken up as the entire matter turns on a very short point.

2. The subject matter of captioned writ petition pertains to assessment of property tax for a 'property at No.17(9), Customs Colony, 1st Cross Street, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600 020' (hereinafter 'said property' for the sake of convenience).

3. This Court is informed that writ petitioner is the owner of said property. This Court is informed that the superstructure qua said property consists of two floors, namely ground floor and first floor. There is also no disputation or disagreement qua the fact that said property had already been assessed to property tax and writ petitioner has been paying the property tax promptly at the rate of Rs.3,099/- upto I/98-99 and at the rate of Rs.4,456/- from II/98-99. To be noted, 'I' denotes first half year and 'II' denotes second half year. First half year in property tax parlance is from 1st of April to 30th September of a year in the English Calendar and the second half year is from 1st October of one English Calendar year to 31st March of succeeding English Calendar year.

4. When things stood as above, the writ petitioner sent a communication dated 18.08.2018 to the respondent i.e., Chennai Corporation and a scanned reproduction of this communication is as follows:

5. The above communication speaks for itself. A perusal of the communication brings to light that the writ petitioner voluntarily i.e., by his own volition brought to the notice of Chennai Corporation that a small portion of the aforementioned superstructure qua said property had been leased out to a Company and that the same is being used for commercial purpose. Learned counsel for writ petitioner, on instructions, submits that 473.13 sq.ft in the ground floor is being used for commercial purpose and from and out of 473.13 sq.ft, 223.5 sq.ft has been leased out. The above letter is not happily worded and this is how the above said letter should be understood is

learned counsel's say. To be noted, the quantum of property tax varies depending on the usage i.e., commercial or residential.

6. In response to the above said voluntary communication from the writ petitioner, the officials of Chennai Corporation have gone over to the said property, made a field assessment (fs Ma;t[) and have sent a communication to the writ petitioner and a scanned reproduction of the same together with the annexures is as follows:

7. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner notwithstanding very many grounds and averments in writ affidavit makes two submissions and they are as follows:

a) No opportunity has been given to the writ petitioner before making the revised assessment enhancing the tax with effect from I/20-21 from Rs.4,456/- to Rs.15,515/- per half year (nearly four fold increase); b) From the annexures to the aforementioned '23.06.2021 communication Ma.Aa.13.Va.Thu,Na.Ka.No. R2/ 1268/2021' (hereinafter 'impugned communication' for the sake of convenience and clarity), it comes to light that Chennai Corporation has proceeded on the basis that the entire ground floor of the superstructure is being used for non-residential purpose (commercial) whereas it is factually incorrect as a large portion of the same was and continues to be used as Advocate's office. Furthering his submissions in this direction, learned counsel draws the attention of this Court to an order dated 05.09.2003 passed by the Taxation Appeals Tribunal made in T.A.T.No.513/2002 with regard to the same property i.e., said property wherein the Tribunal has held that Advocate office should be treated as owner residence. The order reads as follows:

8. In response to the above, learned Standing Counsel for Chennai Corporation submits that an inspection was made and revised assessment enhancing property tax has been arrived at based on the inspection report. However, the break up has not been made available.

9. Owing to the voluntary disclosure by the writ petitioner it is made clear that this case will not serve as a precedent. This Court finds it appropriate to direct Chennai corporation to give break up to the writ petitioner and give an opportunity to the writ petitioner or his duly authorized representative and then redo the revision/enhancement of property tax assessment and communicate the same to the writ petitioner. Before the operative portion of the order is set out, this Court deems it appropriate to mention that it has noticed that the method of assessment of property tax has been set out in the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 and the parameters that are applied to other properties in the City of Chennai, more particularly the properties in that area shall be applied to the said property also.

10. The following order is passed:

a) Impugned order i.e., communication dated 23.06.2021 bearing reference Ma.Aa.13.Va.Thu,Na.Ka. No.R2/1268/2021 sent by the sole respondent is set aside on the ground that opportunity has to be given to the writ petitioner;

b) As the impugned communication together with the annexure is being set aside only to facilitate an opportunity being given to the writ petitioner, who has made voluntary disclosure, though obvious, it is made clear that no opinion or view has been expressed on the merits of the matter in this order. Respondent or any other Officer in Chennai Corporation who is vested with the power to assess property tax shall carry out the revision/assessment after furnishing the break up in terms of sq.ft, type of usage and other parameters or in other words a working sheet to the writ petitioner within a fortnight from today i.e., on or before 09.09.2021 give an opportunity to writ petitioner to respond to working sheet within a fortnight therefrom i.e., on or before 23.09.2021 (opportunity of being heard to the writ petitioner or his duly authorized representative), do the assessment by applying the obtaining parameters for assessment of similar properties and communicate the same to the

writ petitioner under due acknowledgement within one week therefrom i.e., by 06.10.2021. Though obvious, if the petitioner is aggrieved, all other avenues of appeal under IV Schedule to the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 will be available to the writ petitioner qua the revision / assessment notwithstanding this order.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directives. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar gpa To The Assistant Revenue Officer Zone XIII (Adyar) Greater Chennai Corporation No.115, Muthulakshmi Salai Adyar, Chennai - 600 020.

+1cc to Ms.S.Vaitheeswari, Advocate, S.R.No.43243 +1cc to Mr.G.Derrick Sam, Advocate, S.R.No.43331 W.P.No.17801 of 2021 & W.M.P.No.18986 of 2021 SSV(CO) RLP(20/09/2021)