ABDUL SHUKKOOR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR ERNAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is challenging the assessment of Building Tax in respect of the building having separate units with different door nos. as a 'Single Unit' instead of assessing it separately. It is the admitted case of the petitioner that the building was constructed by his own funds in the year, 2005, consisting of '6' separate apartments in the three storied structure. Subsequently, after completion of the building, the petitioner transferred 'four' units to some other persons in the year 2006-2007. It is stated that all the six units are having separate door numbers and electric connection as borne by Ext. P2 property tax receipts and Ext. P3 bills issued by the Kerala State Electricity Board.

(2.) With regard to the sequence of events, the third respondent passed Ext. P5 assessment order whereby the liability of the petitioner was fixed, taking the Building Complex as a single unit. The petitioner challenged the assessment by filing appeal before the second respondent, which led to Ext. P7 order, whereby the claim of the petitioner was rejected. The petitioner approached this Court by filing WP (C) No. 10163/08, where upon it was disposed of by Ext. P8 judgment, directing the petitioner to file statutory revision before the third respondent. The petitioner filed Ext. P9 revision petition which was considered by the first respondent and it was dismissed as per Ext. P10 order, which is under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reliance placed on Explanation 2, to S.2(e) defining the term 'building' is quite wrong and misconceived. The learned counsel submits that the definition of the term 'building' as defined under S.2(e) contemplates assessment of 'part' of the building as well and hence that the buildings constructed by the petitioner, having different units / door nos. are liable to be assessed separately. The term 'building' is defined under S.2(e) as follows: