K M JOHN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is respondent No. 2, the Corporation of Cochin, justified in rejecting the application submitted by the petitioner for remission of building tax during the period of its non-occupation on the ground of delay Shorn of unnecessary details, the essential facts relevant for adjudication of the issue are stated hereunder.

(2.) Petitioner is the owner of a three storied building within the limits of Cochin Corporation. According to him the second and third floors of the said building were not occupied either by him or by any tenant from April 1, 1999 to September 30, 1999. On April 9, 1999 he submitted an application for remission of building tax during the relevant half year period. The said application was rejected by the Corporation on the ground that it was not submitted within the stipulated period. A similar application for remission submitted by the petitioner on April 5, 2000 for the period from April 1, 2000 to September 30, 2000, was also rejected on the same ground. True photo copies of the communication issued by the Corporation in this regard are on record as Exts.P9 and P10. Petitioner seeks to get the above communications quashed in this Writ Petition. There is a further prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or such other appropriate writ or direction to the Corporation and its Revenue Officer to dispose of similar applications for remission for the half year periods starting from October 1, 2000 till March 31, 2002.

(3.) The short question that falls for consideration is whether the benefit of remission of building tax can be denied to an assessee on the ground that he had made the request for remission after the commencement of the period for which remission was sought. It is contended by the Corporation that the assessee will not be entitled to get remission if he does not give notice to the Corporation prior to the commencement of the relevant half year period.