E.K.ANIL Vs. TAHASILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to call for the records relating to Exts.P2 to P4 and to quash the same.

(2.) Facts:

(3.) The first respondent filed a counter affidavit, contending that the Village Officer submitted a proposal before the first respondent to assess building tax of the resort owned by the petitioner in the name and style, "Rain Country Resort, Lakkidi", which was having a total plinth area of 1471.78 sq.mtr. Thereafter, notice was issued to the petitioner and on appearance, the petitioner requested to assess tax on each building separately. On verification of the documents produced by the petitioner, it was found that the petitioner himself is the Managing Director of the said resort and the buildings in the premises are owned by him. It is based on the said findings that building tax was assessed treating the 17 buildings as single unit existing in the premises of the resort. It is further contended that the 17 buildings are owned by a single owner, the petitioner, and the said buildings are used as villas for renting out on daily basis to tourists. It is pointed out that those buildings are functioning under a single administration and form part of the hotel and functionally integrated as a single unit. Hence, according to the first respondent, the 17 buildings of the petitioner were assessed to tax as a single unit and accordingly, assessment has been made as per Sec. 5(5) of the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 (for short, "the Act"). The first respondent relied on a decision of this Court in Lalitha v. State of Kerala [1994 (2) KLT 66], wherein it is held that a hotel complex, which may consist of numerous buildings like cottages, kitchen complex, shopping arcade and so on or a factory complex with its appendages, may constitute one unit for purposes of assessment. Therefore, according to the first respondent, the assessment made is legally sustainable and the writ petition is only to be dismissed.