PRESTIGE EDUCATIONAL TRUST (REGISTERED) Vs. THE TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a charitable Trust that owns buildings. In the writ petition, it challenges Ext. P9 order of the Government which considered the claim of the petitioner for exemption from the provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act in respect of a building that was put up by the petitioner and which housed a Medical College, Dental College, Nursing College etc. By the said order, the Government granted exemption to an extent of 16,809.08 sq. metres, out of a total area of 30176.37 sq. metres which the building covered. Thus, the exemption was denied only to that portion of the building which housed the hospital that was run by the petitioner. Pursuant to Ext. P9 order of the Government, Ext. P10 revised assessment order was passed by the 1st respondent. Exts. P9 and P10 are impugned in the writ petition, inter alia, on the ground that the petitioner Trust being a charitable Trust, was entitled to the benefit of exemption under the Kerala Building Tax Act even in respect of the area that was covered by the hospital.

(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent wherein the sequence of events leading to the passing of Ext. P9 order have been narrated and it is pointed out that only an extent of 14766.56 sq. metres of the building was taken for the purposes of levy of building tax and the remaining portion of the building was exempted by Ext. P9 order after taking into account the charitable activities carried on by the petitioners Trust. It is also pointed out that the petitioner has since remitted amounts of Rs. 2,71,633/- and Rs. 5 lakhs on various dates and the balance amounts due from the petitioner have to be remitted forthwith. Counsel for the petitioner would clarify that as against the said figures mentioned in the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent, the balance amount payable as on today to the respondents, by way of building tax on the said building, is only an amount of Rs. 2,43,267/-. He relies on the letter dated 23.09.2014 issued by the Village Officer, Ancharakandy for this purpose.

(3.) I have heard Sri. K.R. Avinash, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. K.T. Lilly, the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.