Haji S.K.Zainulabdeen v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 30.08.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WP.No.30137 of 2016 and WMP.Nos.26108 & 26109 of 2016 1.Haji S.K.Zainulabdeen 2.Haja K.Mariam Both represented by their Power Agent A.K.Syed Mohamed Yaseen .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner, Rippon Building, Chennai-3.

2.The Zonal Officer, Zone-V [Ward No.60], Chennai.

.. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to Call for the records relating to the first respondent's order made in Notice.7/15-16/ 9935 dated 19.02.2016 to quash the same and to afford an opportunity before any revision of tax and to consequently direct the respondents to continue to accept the previous assessed tax for the petitioner's premises. For Petitioner : M/s.N.R.Jasmine Padma For Respondents : M/s.Karthikaa Ashok

O R D E R

Heard M/s.N.R.Jasmine Padma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. M/s.Karthikaa Ashok, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of either side, the writ petition is taken up for disposal.

2. The petitioner challenges the notice of revised assessment in Form No.7 revising the property tax with

retrospective effect from I/2009-2010. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no arrears of tax as per the pre-revised rate i.e., at the rate of Rs.48,067/- per half year. To establish the same, the petitioner has produced the copy of the property tax collection receipt dated 10.03.2016 evidencing payment of tax for II/2015-2016.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the impugned revised assessment is on account of a general revision.

4. Even assuming it is a case of general revision, assessment can be made only after an opportunity is given to the owner of the property. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served, if the petitioner prefers an appeal to the Commissioner as against the impugned revised assessment, since prior to the impugned revised assessment, no opportunity was granted to the petitioner.

5. In the light of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed and the matter is remanded to the respondents for fresh consideration, who shall first cause an inspection of the building and thereafter, issue a prerevised assessment notice, afford an opportunity to the petitioner to submit their objections and thereafter, complete the assessment in accordance with law. The above direction shall be complied by the respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to state that the petitioner shall continue to remit the property tax at the pre-revised rate. No costs.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar.

/true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar.

gya/cse To 1.The Commissioner, Rippon Building, Chennai-3.

2.The Zonal Officer, Zone-V [Ward No.60], Chennai.

+1 CC to M/s. L. Chandrakumar, Advocate, Sr.No.49134 +1 CC to M/s. Karthikaa Ashok, Advocate, Sr.No.48967 W.P.No.30137 of 2016 RD (CO) MD : 14/09/2016