Case title:
E.K. Anil V. Tahasildar and ors.
Date of Order:
19th October, 2023
Bench:
Hon'ble Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen
Parties:
Petitioner: E.K. Anil
Respondent: Tahasildar and ors.
SUBJECT:
The court held that evaluating the buildings as a single entity is not legally feasible and may be overturned.
OVERVIEW
- The petitioner possesses 17 distinct structures, each with its own building number. 2009 saw the conclusion of an independent assessment following the completion of construction on five of the seventeen structures.
- Following the conclusion of construction on the 12 separate buildings that remained, an assessment was conducted using the 17 structures as a single entity.
ISSUES RAISED
Whether the buildings constructed by the petitioner can be assessed as a single unit or not?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT
- According to the petitioner's learned attorney, the 17 buildings were built on his property as independent structures that are structurally and numerically distinct from one another.
- Based on this, the assessment must be done separately in accordance with Section 2(e) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, which defines "building."
- The learned counsel argues that every building whose construction is finished on or after the designated day will be subject to taxation based on the plinth area at the rate listed in Schedule-I.
- Because each building is structurally unique and built separately, even though they are all located on the petitioner's property, each assessment must be completed separately.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
- On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader would argue that, in accordance with Section 2(e) of the Act, the building can only be evaluated as a single unit because it was built by the petitioner to be a better resort where rooms can be rented out; despite its structural differences, it functions as a single unit.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- The court held that evaluating the buildings as a single entity is not legally feasible and may be overturned.
- The writ petition was dismissed by the court.
- Within two months of receiving a certified copy of this ruling, the assessing authority was ordered to review the assessment, treating each of the 17 structures as a separate unit.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the High Court of Kerala, in the case of E.K. Anil v. Tahasildar and ors., dismissed the petitioner's plea, emphasizing that the 17 structures owned by the petitioner should be assessed separately rather than as a single unit. The court ordered the assessing authority to reevaluate the assessment of each of the 17 structures as individual units within two months.
