NAZAR SINGH Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SANGRUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner owns a house in the town of Barnala Municipality issued a demand notice on the basis that the annual rental value of the house was Rs. 810/- for the year 1977-78. This was done on 4th October, 1977. The petitioner filed objections on 10th October, 1977 saying that he owns only one house and no portion of it was let out to any body and prayed that tax be remitted. The objections were considered by the Municipal Committee and by order dated 17th March, 1978 the annual rental value was assessed at Rs. 640/- after taking into consideration that the house was occupied by a tenant at a monthly rent of Rs. 60/-. Against the aforesaid order the petitioners took the matter in appeal but his appeal was not entertained by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur, because he did not deposit the house tax before filing the appeal as is required by Section 85(2) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 (for short 'the Act'). Feeling aggrieved this writ petition has been filed.

(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record I am of the view that this writ petition deserves to succeed on two counts. Firstly in view of Section 66 of the Act, the annual rental value which was sought to be fixed during 1977-78 would have been available to the Municipal Committee for levying house tax for the ensuing year i.e. for the year 1978-79 and not for the year 1977-78 as was sought to be done. Therefore, no demand notice on the basis of proceedings taken by the Municipal Committee can be issued for the year 1977-78. Of course the assessment made during the year 1977-78 would have been available to the Municipal Committee for levying house tax for the ensuing year i.e. 1978-79.

(3.) The Additional Deputy Commissioner, in view of the aforesaid statement of law, was in error in saying that the appeal was not competent because the house tax was not deposited before the filing of the appeal. As already noticed no house tax was payable for year 1977-78 and annual rental value was being determined so as to entitle the Municipal Committee to levy house tax for the ensuing year. The demand notice which was issued on 4th October, 1977 was for the year 1977-78 which was not permissible in view of Section 66 of the Act. Therefore, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner against the assessment of the annual rental value was competent as the petitioner had not deposited any tax before the filing of the appeal.