HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO C.M.S.A. No.38 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: The appeal is filed against the Judgment in C.M.A.No.9 of 2007 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, dismissing the same questioning the enhancement of the tax. 2. The appellant is the owner of the building and he was assessed to tax of Rs.677/- till 31.03.2001 and it was enhanced to Rs.1,627/- with effect from 01.04.2001 by a special notice. Thereafter on 22.01.2002 a notice was received fixing the half early tax at Rs.2,342/- and the appellant has filed C.M.A.No.95 of 2002 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, and the appeal was allowed and matter was carried in appeal to the High Court in C.M.S.A.No.98 of 2005, the said appeal was disposed on 21.09.2006. During the pendency of second appeal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a Special Leave to appeal (Civil) under Zonal system has directed that under zonal system all objections and revisions filed by the assesses before the Commissioner shall be considered afresh and if any assessee wishes to inspect the Assessment Book, an opportunity to be given. In pursuance of the above directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, a notice was served on the appellant about the keeping of the assessment registers open and the appellant visited the office of the respondent. But, according to the appellant, the respondent did not provide assessment books. Thereafter, he submitted his objections and a notice was served on 11.12.2006 fixing the tax at Rs.1,979/- per half year from 01.04.2001 with arrears and therefore, the appeal was filed. 3. The appellant herein has contended that the notice of enhancement is not proper and is not in accordance with the scheme of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and therefore, it is liable to be set aside. However, the Corporation contended that the imposition of the tax was in accordance with law and Zonal regulations and no relief can be granted. Accepting the contention of the respondent, the appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said order, the present second appeal is filed questioning the imposition of the tax as being violative of the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act and also the law laid down by the Supreme Court and consequently to set aside the assessment order. 4. The point that arises for consideration is whether the enhancement of the tax is violative of the mandatory provisions of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act? 5. POINT: The lower Court found that the Municipal Corporation has served a special notice and the appellant has filed a revision petition and the appellant was directed to inspect the records, which are the assessment books. Evidently, the assessment books and the rate of tax was published circle wise and the lower Court has perused those documents as a question of fact and after verifying the record, came to the conclusion that the assessment books and other registers were made available. There is no material to show that the process of enhancement of the tax undertaken by the Municipal Corporation is against the principles of law, so also the preparation of the assessment books or division of the zones is improper. There is also no proof that the rental values are less. In fact, the trend is only for the enhancement of the rental values, the amenities are also to be provided by the Corporation. 6. In view of the circumstances, the enhancement of the tax cannot be said to be unreasonable and there is no proof of any violation of the statutory rules in assessing the tax. Therefore, there are no merits in the appeal. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO Date:18.10.2011 INL