KUTTY FLUSH DOORS AND FURNITURE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. MADRAS METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Furniture Company, is having its registered office at 37, Poonamallee High Road, Koyambedu, Madras. The premises comes under the Koyambedu Panchayat Union and they have no water supply to the premises. The occupants make their own arrangements for providing water supply. The first respondent has not also made any arrangement for supply of protected water supply to the premises. The Madras Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) supersedes all other connected Acts and the Board is exclusively attending to the needs of the public within the area covered by the Act. The petitioner has referred to the various provisions of the Act and I will make a reference to them, if and when necessary. In this case, the petitioner is primarily concerned with the levy of water tax and the notice issued on 17.1.1990, in and by which a huge demand is made as water tax for the assessment years 2/79-80 till 2/89-90. The total amount demanded is Rs. 29,429.40 at the rate of Rs. 1,337-70 per half year. The notice says that the water and sewerage tax as detailed therein should be paid within 30 days of the date of the bill. The contention of the petitioner is that no demand was ever made for payment of water-tax in respect of the premises at any time, before the impugned notice, dated 17.1.1990. It is in fact contended that there was no levy at all as contemplated under the Act, and therefore, the demand is illegal. It is also pointed out that the Board has not provided any facilities, like water supply or sewerage connection to the subject premises. Therefore, it is contended that the respondents are not entitled to demand the water tax. Petitioner refers to Art. 265 of the Constitution of India, read with Sec. 84(b) of the Act to argue that no tax can be levied or collected without the authority of law.

(2.) In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents-Board, it is stated that the Koyambedu village was a Panchayat and added to the Madras City in the year 1979. It comes within the Madras City Municipal Corporation limits. Therefore, it is pointed out the Board has jurisdiction over the subject area. It is contended that the Board has every right to collect water and sewerage tax for the areas notified under Sec. 34 of the Act. The Board has been empowered to collect water tax at 7% of the annual value of the building, as assessed by the City Municipal Corporation. The Board also claims that the arrears of tax can be collected by resort to the Revenue Recovery Act. The assessment was made on the basis of the annual rental value fixed by the Corporation of Madras. The counter-affidavit proceeds to say that proper notices for payment of tax had been made earlier. It is only because the taxes have not been paid, that the impugned noticed was issued.

(3.) When the matter came up for final disposal, after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I asked the learned Counsel for the Board to produce the records and prove to the satisfaction of the court that assessment and levy had been made at the appropriate time and a demand notice had been served on the petitioner as and when the taxes became due. Learned counsel for the respondents took time and reports today that the records are not available to prove the assessment, levy and demand at the appropriate time. In these circumstances, I have to proceed to dispose of the writ petition on the basis that there was no prior assessment, levy or demand of water tax from the petitioner at any time, except the impugned notice, dated 17.1.1990. Let me now refer to the provisions of law as contained in the Act. There are two levies under the Act, one called water tax and sewerage tax and the other is water charges. Here itself I will make it clear that we are not concerned with water charges, which may arise when the Board makes arrangement to give water supply to the area in question. In this case, it is not disputed that water supply has not been provided by the Board for the subject area. We are therefore concerned only with the assessment and levy of water tax and sewerage tax which can be levied irrespective of the provision of water supply. Sec. 34 of the Act provides for the levy of water tax and sewerage tax and it is as follows: