IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2008 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 992 of 2008(R) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ 1. SEBASTIAN DAVIS, ADVOCATE, PLACKATTU COLONY, ELAMKULAM, KOCHI-17. 2. RANI DAVIS, W/O.SEBASTIAN DAVIS, PLACKATTU COLONY, ELAMKULAM, KOCHI-17. BY ADV. SRI.A.ANTONY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY G.P. SRI. E.P. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.7.97 PASSED BY R1 EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.5.99 PASSED BY R2 EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 28.6.99 FILED BEFORE R3 EXT.P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.2.2000 PASSED BY R3 EXT.P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.1.2006 IN OP 8948 OF 2000 EXT.P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF R3 DATED 25.10.2007 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 992 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioners are challenging building tax assessment completed vide Ext.P1 whereunder revised rate introduced in July, 1996 is applied. Petitioners' case is that construction of the building was completed in 1988 and therefore the rate to be applied is pre-revised rate. Even though petitioner contested the matter in appeal and revision, the authorities below held that petitioner has not established that completion of construction of the building was prior to 1997, when the assessment order was issued. Counsel for the petitioner rightly pointed out that Ext.P1 assessment file itself was initiated in 1990 and it is stated in the said assessment order that building was completed during 1988. It is rather an admitted position that construction of the building was completed in 1988 and therefore the rate of tax introduced with effect from July, 1996 is not applicable. In fact the Collector in his first revisional order has held that the rate of tax to be applied is the one prevalent on the date of completion of assessment. However, this 2 is contrary to the position declared by this Court that the rate to be applied is the rate prevalent on the date of completion of construction of the building. Consequently W.P. is allowed directing the first respondent to revise the assessment on the plinth area after excluding the plinth area of the car porch at the rate of tax for residential building, prevailing prior to revision of rate of tax in July, 1996 (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3