IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 11748 of 2004(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL RAZAK, S/O.MOHAMMED, KUNUMMAL HOUSE, KARIPPARAMBU, PATHARAGADI, THIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD VALLIKAPPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, TIRURANGADI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM. BY G.P. SRI.TEKCHAND THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY R3. P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R1 DT.24.11.02. P3: TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DT.27.3.03. P4: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R2 DT.22.7.03. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.11748 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging demand of luxury tax in respect of his residential building on the ground that building is an old one constructed in 1992. However, petitioner does not dispute the fact that major repairs were carried out to the building. If plinth area is increased, then the building is liable to be assessed for building tax and luxury tax by virtue of Section 5 (4) of of the Kerala Building Tax Act. This court has held that luxury tax will be payable even for an old building, if there is construction of additional plinth area after 1.4.1999 whereby total plinth area exceeds 278.7 sq. metres and above. It is clear from Ext.P2 that the plinth area of petitioner's building is 320 sq. metres which attracts luxury tax. The petitioner has not produced the building tax assessment made in 1992 after completion of construction of the building then. If the plinth area of the building assessed originally in 1992 is the same, then of course there is no addition to the plinth area justifying demand of luxury tax. Since petitioner has not produced original assessment showing the plinth area of the building, petitioner is given freedom to make application for rectification 2 before the Tahsildar, if the plinth area originally assessed is same as the plinth area now assessed, for the Tahsildar to rectify the assessment withdrawing demand of luxury tax. However, if plinth area originally assessed is not the plinth area assessed for the new building, then petitioner will be liable to pay luxury tax. The W.P.(C) is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms