EAST INDIA HOTELS LTD Vs. ASSESSING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two questions that arise for determination in this Writ petition are; (1) whether the petitioner namely, East India India Hotels Ltd. is liable to pay property tax in respect of the six shops which the petitioner had given on rent to various persons and (2) if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether the assessment to property tax can have retrospective effect.

(2.) THE petitioner is running a hotel under the name and style of Oberoi Palace Hotel at Srinagar. The premises belong to Dr. Karan Singh, the 2nd Respondent herein, who had leased out the said premises to the petitioner under a lease deed dated 17 -6 -1954 on a monthly rental of Rs.

(3.) 000/ - for the first ten years and thereafter on a monthly rental of Rs. 3,850/ - The six shops in respect of which tax has been levied on the petitioner under the Jammu and Kashmir Urban Immovable Property Tax Act, 1962, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) originally comprised Garages when the lease was executed. Subsequently they were converted into shops and different persons were permitted to make use of these shops under licence deeds executed by the petitioner in favour of the shopkeepers which were valid for one year at a time. The rent or the licence fee which the petitioner has received from the shopkeepers amounts to Rs. 84,000/ - per year. It is on the basis of this amount of Rs. 84.000/ - that the assessing authority under the Act has determined the annual letting value of the six shops and levied the tax on the petitioner. 3. The assessment was first made on 28 -9 -1968 in respect of the assessment years 1962 -1963 to 1968 -1969 and the petitioner had there -upon filed writ petition No. 211 of 1968 in this court challenging the assessment on two grounds, namely (1) that the petitioner was not liable to pay the tax as it was not the owner of the property, and (2) that in any case the assessment could not be made with retrospective effect. The nature of the order passed by this court in the said writ petition will be referred to at a later stage in some detail, but for the present, it would suffice to state that this court by its judgment dated 8 -10 -1969, set aside the assessment and directed the assessing authority under the Act to give another opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence in support of its case that it was not the owner of the property. In pursuance of this direction the assessing authority gave opportunity to the petitioner to adduce further evidence, but on a consideration of the said evidence the assessing authority again held that the petitioner was the owner of the six shops and was liable to pay the tax under the "Act in respect of the said shops. The assessing authority passed two fresh orders dated 21 -12 -1972 levying the tax for the assessment years 1962 -1963 to 1968 -1968 and 1969 -1970 to 1972 -1973. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the said assessment.