JOHNSON FERNANDO Vs. COMMISSIONER TUTICORIN MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN W.P.No.8669 of 2003, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari, in calling for the records relating to the proceedings in RC.No.25125/98-A2 dated 22.5.2002 as confirmed by the order in Cur.No.A2/17815/02 (R.P.No.1/02) dated 22.7.2002 both on the file of the Commissioner, Tuticorin Municipality, Tuticorin(The respondents herein) and to quash the same. IN W.P.No.8670 of 2003, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, in calling for the records relating to the notice in A2.22273/02 dated 12.9.2002 passed by the Commissioner, Tuticorin Municipality, Tuticorin (the first respondent herein) and to quash the same and direct the Chairman, Taxation Appeal Committee, Tuticorin Municipality, Tuticorin (the Second respondent herein) to entertain the memorandum of appeal dated 13.8.2002 preferred by the petitioner to the second respondent against the proceedings in Cur.No.A2/17815/02 (R.P.No.1/02) dated 22.7.2002 on the file of the Commissioner,Tuticorin Municipality,Tuticorin (the first respondent herein) and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.

(2.) THE petitioners/Directors of Hotel Johney International Private Limited are the joint owners of the land and buildings bearing Door Nos.259-B,260/260-A and 261/261-A, V.E.Road, Tuticorin-628 003 and the said properties were assessed by the respondent in the names of the petitioners jointly. THE petitioners constructed the lodging complex and commissioned the same in the year 1997 and the same was assessed to the properties tax bearing assessment Nos.321011, 321287 and 321288 with effect from 1.4.1997,1.10.1997 and 1.10.1997 respectively by specifying separate door Nos. As 259-B for the basement, 260 for ground floor and 261 for the other floors.

(3.) ALSO, on the side of the petitioners, a plea is put forward to the effect that to employ Section 117(A) of the said Act, there ought to have been escaped assessment to any of the year or the case of the property tax, has not been duly assessed in any half year or year consequent on the building or land concerned having escaped proper determination of its annual value, then the Commissioner may, at any time within six years from the date on which such person should have been assessed serve on such person a notice assessing him to the tax or fee due and demanding payment there of within fifteen days from the date of such service etc and Section 117(A) of the Act cannot be applied to the property owned by the petitioners in any manner and even in the impugned order dated 22.7.2002, the respondent had not pointed out any of the suppression or errors or escaped materials while assessing the original orders of assessment and except appending a working sheet to the order dated 22.5.2002 being attached, the respondents had not stated anything in the said order and therefore, the said order is not valid one in the eye of law.