High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-08-12Writ petitions allowed; set aside the challenge...

W.P.(C) Nos. 25574 of 2022 & 25689 of 2022 — Thrissur Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Tahsildar and Village Officer, Guruvayoor; and Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Chavakkad

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 25574 of 2022 & WP(C) No. 25689 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Judgment Date: 2022-08-12
Court Decision / Holding: The writ petitions are allowed. Ext.P14 and Ext.P15 in both W.P.C Nos. 25574/2022 and 25689/2022 are set aside along with Ext.P16 and Ext.P17 (demand notices). The court directs the Assessing Officer to complete the assessments of the apartment complexes within six months from receipt of the judgment date, issuing speaking orders after granting hearing and allowing documentary submissions; the orders must refer to the petitioner’s contentions. The petitioner and individual owners may place documents for proper assessment; the assessment must proceed with transparent reasoning.
Final Disposition: Writ petitions allowed; set aside the challenged assessment orders and related demand notices; directive for a six-month window to complete re-assessment with speaking orders after hearing; opportunity to submit documents.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Thrissur Builders Pvt. Ltd.

Respondents

Tahsildar and Assessing Authority, Taluk Office, Chavakkad, Thrissur
Village Officer, Guruvayoor Village, Guruvayoor P.O., Thrissur

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• K.I. Mayankutty Mather
• S. Parvathi Kalliyani
• Krishna B. Uthara Asokan

Counsels for Respondents

• Smt. Reshmitha R. Chandran, Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

These two closely related writ petitions filed under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 by Thrissur Builders Pvt. Ltd. challenge two onetime building tax assessments and the related luxury tax assessments for two residential apartment complexes in Thrissur: Muraleeravam Apartments (completed 2012) and Krishna Kripa Apartments (completed 2008). Following notices under the Act (Sections 9(2)/9(4)) the petitioner submitted documents claiming that the properties comprise separate residential units and should be assessed unit-wise rather than as a single complex. The petitioner contends that the assessment orders (Exts.P14 and P15) are non-speaking, silent on the documents produced, and issued in a mechanical fashion, violating the principles of natural justice. The Government Pleader counters that the assessments were conducted under the statutory framework and should stand unless proven unlawful. The High Court emphasizes that an assessment order must be a speaking order with reasons, citing Tharu v. Tahsildar and Abraham Thomas and Others v. State of Kerala and Others to support this proposition. Observing non-application of mind in the impugned orders, the court sets aside Exts.P14 and P15 in both petitions, along with the corresponding demand notices, and directs the assessing officer to redraft the assessments within six months after affording hearing and allowing submission of documents, with speaking reasons. The petitions are allowed on these terms.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975Section 9(2)/9(4) of the Kerala Building Tax Act

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Principles of natural justice
Speaking order requirement
Non-speaking orders are impermissible under due process

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Petitioner contends that Exts.P14 and P15 are non-speaking and prematurely issued without considering documents supporting separate apartment units; argues that the apartment complexes should be treated as separate units and not as a single unit; claims delayed assessments (over a decade) are impermissible and requests setting aside the orders and re-assessment with opportunity for hearing.

Contentions of Respondents

Respondents contend that the assessments were conducted under the Kerala Building Tax Act; the notices were issued in accordance with law; objections raised by the petitioner and the Government Pleader are to be considered at an appropriate stage; the maintenance of tax and related charges should be permissible under statutory provisions.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Tharu v. Tahsildar	2003 (1) KLT 219	Positive	Cited as authority for the proposition that an assessment order must be a speaking order with reasons supportive of the assessment.
Abraham Thomas and Others v. State of Kerala and Others	2010 (2) KHC 792	Positive	Cited to reinforce the requirement of natural justice and speaking orders in tax assessments.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C) Nos. 25574 of 2022 & 25689 of 2022 — Thrissur Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Tahsildar and Village Officer, Guruvayoor; and Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Chavakkad and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS** **FRIDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER :** **THRISSUR BUILDERS PVT LTD., 25/1160/1, MACHINGAL - LANE, NORTH END, THRISSUR – 680 001, REPRESENTING BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR - K.A. PADMAKUMAR** **BY ADVS. K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER S.PARVATHI KALLIYANI KRISHNA B. UTHARA ASOKAN** ## **RESPONDENTS :** **1 TAHSILDAR AND ASSESSING AUTHORITY TALUK OFFICE, CHAVAKAD P.O., THRISSUR, PIN – 680 496 2 VILLAGE OFFICER, GURUVAYOOR, VILLAGE, GURUVAYOOR P.O., THRISSUR, PIN – 680 101 BY SMT.RESHMITHA R.CHANDRAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25689/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 2 ## **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER :** **THRISSUR BUILDERS PVT.LTD., 25/1160/1, MACHINGAL LANE-NORTH END, THRISSUR, PIN – 680 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR - K.A.PADMAKUMAR** **BY ADVS. K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER S.PARVATHI KALLIYANI KRISHNA B. UTHARA ASOKAN** ## **RESPONDENTS :** **1 TAHSILADAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHAVAKKAD P.O., THRISSUR, PIN – 680 506 2 VILLAGE OFFICER, GURUVAYOOR VILLAGE, GURUVAYOOR.P.O., THRISSUR, PIN – 680 001 BY SMT.RESHMITHA R.CHANDRAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25574/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** 3 ## **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.** =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ## **W.P.(C) No.25574 of 2022 & W.P.(C) NO.25689 of 2022** =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= **Dated this the 12[th] day of August, 2022** ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner in these two writ petitions challenge the orders of assessment issued under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 ('the Act' for short), imposed in respect of two separate buildings. Since the entire apartment building has been assessed as a single unit, consequent luxury tax has also been assessed and the said order is also impugned. Ext.P14 and Ext.P15 orders dated 10.03.2022 are impugned in these two writ petitions. 2. Sri.K.I.Mayankutty Mather, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a perusal of Ext.P14 and Ext.P15 orders will reveal the illegality as the same are not only non-speaking orders but has also been issued without considering any of the documents that were produced by the petitioners. 3. Petitioner had constructed residential apartment complexes at Thrissur by name ‘Muraleeravam Apartments' and 'Krishna Kripa Apartments.’ The construction of the building by name ‘Muraleeravam 4 ## **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** apartment’ was completed on 19.11.2012, while the latter mentioned apartment was completed on 23.09.2008. Pursuant to returns filed by the petitioner, notices were issued as contemplated under the Act as per Ext.P11 and Ext.P12 in these two writ petitions. Consequent to the said notices, several documents were allegedly submitted by the petitioner claiming and indicating the existence of separate apartments and sought for assessing each unit independently. It was also claimed that even before the occupancy certificate was issued, majority of the apartments involved in both these writ petitions had been sold and under no circumstances whatsoever could the apartment complex be assessed as a single unit. 4. I have heard Sri.K.I.Mayankutty Mather, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt.Reshmitha R.Chandran, the learned Government Pleader. 5. This Court has time and again held that an order of assessment must be a speaking order and should give reasons in support of the assessment. Reference can be invited to the decision in _**Tharu v. Tahsildar** [2003 (1) KLT 219]_ as well as in _**Abraham Thomas and Others v. State of Kerala and Others** [2010 (2) KHC 792]_ . 6. Since the above proposition of law is elementary and a glance at the impugned orders of assessment in both these writ petitions reveal the non-application of mind, I am of the view that the said assessment orders **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** **==> picture [7 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** cannot stand the test of law. The impugned orders in both these writ petitions are liable to be set aside. The various contentions raised by the petitioner as well as the objections raised by the learned Government Pleader can also be left open for consideration at the appropriate stage. 7. Since the impugned orders of assessment are passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as they are non-speaking and issued in a mechanical manner, I set aside Ext.P14 and Ext.P15 in W.P.(C) No.25574 of 2022 as well as Ext.P14 and Ext.P15 in W.P.(C) No.25689 of 2022. The consequential notices demanding tax issued as Ext.P16 and Ext.P17 in both these writ petition shall also stand set aside. 8. As pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, the assessments relate to buildings whose constructions were completed in 2008 as well as in 2012 and the assessment is delayed for the last more than 10 years. Such delayed assessments are impermissible and goes contrary to the intent of the statute. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that the assessing officer should take appropriate steps, as expeditiously as possible to complete the assessment. Therefore, there will be a direction to complete the assessments of the apartment complex by name 'Muraleeravam Apartments' and 'Krishna Kripa Apartments' within an outer period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to mention that the orders of assessment to be issued shall be a speaking **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** **==> picture [7 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** order, referring to the contentions raised and shall be issued after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the individual apartment owners. Petitioner shall also be free to place all the documents required for a proper assessment, without further delay. The writ petitions are allowed as above. ## **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE** RKM **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** 7 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25689/2022** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** : **ExhibitP1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 10.07.2006 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND MURARI SANBHU AND BINDU DEVI Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 07.12.2006 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND K.V. KRISHNAN** **Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 10.02.2007 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND SHEELA VENUGOPAL, W/O. DR. C.S. VENUGOPAL** **ExhibitP4 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCERNING MURARI SANBHU AND BINDU DEVI DATED NIL** **Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCERNING SRI. K.V. KRISHNAN DATED NIL ExhibitP6 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCERNING SRI. DR. C.S. VENUGOPAL DATED NIL Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE OBTAINED FROM GURUVAYOOR MUNICIPALITY DATED 17.04.2010** **Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1086/2008 OF KOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF MURARI SANBHU AND BINDU DEVI DATED 10.04.2008 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1184/2008 OF KOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF SRI. K.V.KRISHNAN DATED 30.04.2008 Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1594/2008 OF KOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF DR.C.S.VENUGOPAL DATED 10.06.2008** 8 ## **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** **Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 9(2)/9(4) OF THE KERALA BUILDING TAX ACT DATED 8.8.2017** **Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.9.2017** **ExhibitP13 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2017** **Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ONETIME BUILDING TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT** **Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE LUXURY TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.3.2022** **Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 14.07.2022** 9 ## **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25574/2022** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND SARATH KUMAR AND SUSEELA S. KUMAR ON THE OTHER PART DATED 15.06.2011** - **Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND SUNIL KUMAR AND ANURADHA EON THE OTHER PART DATED 18.01.2011** - **Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ON ONE PART AND T.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR AND VILASINI M. NAIR ON THE OTHER PART DATED 15.11.2010** - **Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCERNING SARATH KUMAR AND SUSEELA S. KUMAR** - **Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCERNING SUNIL KUMAR AND ANURADHA E** - **Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LEDGER FOLIO CONCE1NING T. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR AND VILASINI M. NAIR** - **Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE OBTAINED FROM GURUVAYOOR MUNICIPALITY DATED 19.4.2013** - **Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2298/2013 OFKOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF SARATH KUMAR AND SUSEELA S. KUMAR DATED 09.10.2013** **Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2025/2012 OF KOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF SUNIL KUMAR AND ANURADHA E DATED 25.10.2012** **WP(C) NO. 25574 OF 2022 & WP(C) NO. 25689 OF 2022** 10 **Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1149/2013 OFKOTTAPPADY SRO IN THE NAME OF T.MURALEEDHARAN NAIR AND VILASINI M.NAIR** - **Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 08.08.2017 Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 27.09.2017** **Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 25.10.2017** - **Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ONETIME BUILDING TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 10.3.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT** - **Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE LUXURY TAX ASSESSMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.3.2022** **Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER LEVYING HOUSING PROJECT CESS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 10.3.2022** **Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 14.07.2022**