HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO C.M.S.A. No.29 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the judgment in A.S.No.17 of 2002 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, where-under the assessment of the tax of the non-residential building was enhanced from Rs.6,010/- to Rs.9,616/- from 01.04.2002 to 30.09.2002 was challenged and the same was dismissed. 2. According to the appellant, a special notice was served on 18.07.2002 to pay the enhanced rate of tax and he preferred a revision before the Commissioner questioning the enhancement at 60% and the revision was dismissed. It was contended that no opportunity was given for hearing of the appeal and the permissible deductions under Section 212 of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act (for short, ‘the Act’) were not given and the fixation of the rental value is improper. The respondent contended that the increase of the tax was as per the directions of the Government and in G.O.Ms.No.155 M.A., dated 18.04.2002 the enhancement of tax was directed to be restricted to 75% in respect of residential buildings. In G.O.Ms.No.168 M.A., dated 18.04.2002 directions were given for enhancement of the tax of 100% over the buildings for non-residential buildings constructed more than 25 years old and 150% on non-residential buildings constructed less than 25 years. Thereafter, the rate payers made several representations to the Corporation and the Corporation has resolved to enhance the tax at 33 1/3% on residential buildings and at the rate of 60% on non-residential buildings. Accordingly, the tax was enhanced. 3. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge accepted the contention of the respondent and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appeal is filed. 4. The point that arises for consideration is whether the Municipal Corporation can enhance the tax unilaterally without following the provisions under the Corporation Act and without any reasons? 5. The fact that the premises is a non-residential building is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the enhancement of the tax was done as per the directions of the Government and it is also not in dispute that the Corporation has got power to enhance the tax by itself. Even though the Government has permitted higher enhancement, the Corporation has restricted the enhancement to only 60%. There is no material to show that the rental values have not increased or not the commercial nature of the premises has not increased. In this connection, it is useful to refer to the decision reported in Shan Zahoor and others Vs. Vijayawada Municipal Corporation rep. by its Commissioner ([1]). In the above case also the power of the Government to issue directions to the Corporation for increase of the quantum of the tax by the Municipalities was considered and it was found that it is statutorily valued. In this case also the Municipal Corporation claims to have followed all the rules and in spite of the fact that the Government has permitted enhancement of over 100%, the Municipal Corporation has only restricted the enhancement to 60%. Therefore, it cannot be said that the enhancement is excessive or arbitrary. Consequently, there are no merits in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:18.10.2011 INL [1] 2004(4) ALT 781