SHERLY THOMAS NALPATHAMKALAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the owner of a residential building, and this writ petition is filed by her, being aggrieved by the building tax assessment in respect of the said building.

(2.) According to the petitioner, the total plinth area of the building is 270.17 Square Meters, which is the plinth area mentioned in the Occupancy Certificate issued by the Changanasserry Municipality. In Ext.P1, the plinth area of 270.17 Square meters was approved by the Town Planning Officer as well. However, later, Ext.P2 proceedings were issued by the 4 th respondent, imposing luxury tax under Sec. 5A of the Kerala Building Tax Act and also making a demand of Rs.2,460.00 which is the remaining amount payable based on the revision of one time building tax payable by the petitioner. The assessment of the luxury tax was made, in view of the fact that in the measurement, the plinth area of the building was found to be more than 278.7 Square meters, therefore it was found that the petitioner is liable to pay luxury tax.

(3.) Aggrieved by Ext.P2, a statutory appeal was submitted before the 3rd respondent and it culminated in Ext.P3. As per the order passed by the 3rd respondent, the building of the petitioner, was remeasured on 20/7/2017 in the presence of the petitioner and her lawyer, and in such remeasurement, the total plinth area of the building was found to be 297.34 Square meters. In the light of the above, the appeal was submitted. Even though Ext.P5 revision petition was submitted before the 2 nd respondent, the District Collector, the same was rejected as per Ext.P6. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances, challenging the assessment and the demand.