B S VERMA Vs. MCD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, by this writ petition impugns the order dated 29th April, 2009 of the Municipal Taxation Tribunal dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 6th January, 2006 of the Assessor and Collector of the respondent MCD assessing the rateable value of property E-305, East of Kailash, New Delhi of the petitioner, w.e.f. 1st April, 1999 at Rs.1,07,700.00 and w.e.f. 1st April, 2002 to 31st March, 2004 at Rs.1,21,780.00. THE rateable value of the said property of the petitioner, was vide earlier order dated 14th August, 2002 of the Assessor and Collector of the respondent MCD assessed at Rs.1,50,000.00 w.e.f. 1st April, 1999. THE said assessment was pursuant to the notice under Section 126 of the DMC Act issued to the petitioner for enhancement of rateable value on account of the petitioner having let out the ground floor of the property at a rent of Rs.10,000.00 per month. It was the contention of the petitioner that there was no tenant on the ground floor of the house and the Assessor and Collector had wrongly passed the order dated 14th August, 2002 on the basis of the property being so let out. It was also his contention that even if the version of the respondent MCD of the ground floor being let out at the rent of Rs.10,000.00 per month was to be believed, the rateable value of the entire property could still not be Rs.1,50,000.00. THE petitioner had thus applied for rectification and which was allowed and resulted in the order dated 6th January, 2006 assessing the rateable value w.e.f. 1st April, 1999 at Rs.1,07,700.00 instead of Rs.1,50,000.00. THE rateable value w.e.f. 1st April, 2002 was increased owing to the construction on the second floor.

(2.) THERE is no dispute with respect to the construction on the second floor. The challenge by the petitioner in the appeal before the Tribunal was only on the ground of the Assessor and Collector having held the property to have been let out. It was the contention of the petitioner that the property was never let out and thus the assessment on the premise of the ground floor being let out at a rent of Rs.10,000.00 per month is wrong.

(3.) THE counsel for the respondent MCD without filing any counter affidavit to the petition has placed before this Court the file of the assessment and contends that the petitioner appearing in person before the Assessor and Collector on 26th December, 2005 had confined his grievance to rectification of assessment treating the ground floor to be let out at Rs.10,000.00 per month; she contends that there is thus nothing wrong in the order of the Tribunal.