IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 4604 of 2011(A) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- C.C.VARGHESE,CHIRAKARAYIL,KADAMATTOM.PO, AIKKARANAD SOUTH,KOLENCHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE,CIVIL STATION,KAKKANAD - 20. 3. THAHASILDAR KUNNATHUNADU, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR - 683 543. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.4604 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Challenge in this writ petition is against assessment of Building Tax finalised under Section 5(4) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975. The petitioner had effected considerable renovation in the existing building, which had resulted in increase of plinth area. The renovated building was assessed under Ext.P1 for a total tax liability of Rs.75,600/-, reckoning the plinth area as 999.32 Sq.m. The assessing authority had given credit to the amount of Rs.15,600/- already remitted through the assessment completed with respect to the existing area, and the balance amount of Rs.60,000/- was directed to be remitted in 4 equal quarterly instalments. 2. The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 order if assessment by filing revision petition as provided under Section 13 of the Act. Initially the revision petition was not W.P.(C).4604/11 -2- entertained for the reason that the petitioner has not resorted to the remedy of appeal. But by virtue of Ext.P5 judgment of this court the revisional authority was directed to consider the revision petition and to dispose of the same on merits subject to condition of the petitioner remitting payment of 50% amount. Ext.P6 is the order issued by the revisional authority in compliance of the directions contained in Ext.P5 judgment. 3. It is evident that the contentions raised by the petitioner was to the effect that he is only liable to pay Building Tax for the extended portion of 596.36 Sq.m. Therefore the assessment of Building Tax by computing the entire plinth area of the building, was assailed before the revisional authority. 4. I am of the view that the contentions raised in this regard deserve no merit, in view of the provisions contained under Section 5(4), which prescribes that the procedure to be followed in the assessment of Building Tax in case of alterations and extensions made which will result in W.P.(C).4604/11 -3- increase of plinth area. It is further noticed that the validity of Section 5(4) had already been upheld by a Division Bench of this court. Under such circumstances, since the impugned assessment was completed adopting procedure as contemplated under Section 5(4), the changes raised against such assessment fails, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, and I do so. 5. However, the 3rd respondent is directed to permit the petitioner to make payment of the balance tax amount due in 2 (two) quarterly instalments, first of which shall be paid within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the subsequent instalments within a period of 3 months thereafter. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb