T N RADHA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) PETITIONER challenges Ext.P4. The case of the petitioner is that she had constructed a building the plinth area of which is 196.5 sq.meters. In 2005, she made additions to the existing structure which resulted in the increase of plinth area by 93.7 sq.meters. By Ext.P1, luxury tax was assessed in respect of the structure reckoning the total plinth area. Accordingly, petitioner paid the tax also. Subsequently, Ext.P2 was issued by the Government of Kerala clarifying that in respect of the building to which additional construction is made, when the liability for luxury tax is reckoned, the plinth area of the existing structure should not be taken into account. In other words, by this clarification, Government stated that in reckoning the plinth area in respect of such buildings for fixing luxury tax, the area of the existing structure should be ignored. Following the issuance of Ext.P2, petitioner says that she submitted Ext.P3 before the second respondent. Subsequently, the second respondent issued Ext.P4 rejecting the appeal dated 12.3.2012 on the ground that the appeal filed by the petitioner is belated, in terms of the provisions contained under Section 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed.

(3.) NEEDLESS to say that this Court has not examined the merits of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.