2025 (4) TMI 1310 - HC - Indian Laws

Building Tax - Seeking for a direction to quash Ext.P3 - seeking also for a direction to reconsider Ext.P2 and assess building tax on petitioner s building as per the plinth area in the plan approved by the local authority - HELD THAT - The Kerala Building Tax Act 1975 provides for assessment of building tax. Once an order of assessment is passed the assessing authority becomes practically functus officio for the purpose of building tax. The remedy of a person aggrieved by an order of assessment is to prefer statutory appeal and revision as provided under the Act. In the absence of any statutory remedy invoked by the petitioner the assessment order became final. Therefore recourse to Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not proper. In the instant case petitioner had even acquiesced into the order by paying the first instalment and thereafter he has turned around and now requests for acceptance of a portion of the amount in satisfaction of the entire tax assessed. Such a procedure is unheard in law. Once tax has been assessed the entire amount has to be paid unless there are amnesty schemes. There are no merit in this writ petition and it is dismissed without prejudice to the remedies if any available under the Act.

Summary

The Kerala High Court, through Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas, dismissed the writ petition seeking to quash Ext.P3 and to have the building tax reassessed based on the approved plinth area. The petitioner, owner of the property, had been assessed building tax amounting to Rs.12,42,800/- under the Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 and had paid the first installment, thereby acquiescing to the assessment order. The Court emphasized that once an assessment order is passed, the assessing authority becomes "practically functus officio," and the statutory remedy lies in appeal or revision under the Act. The petitioner's attempt to negotiate partial payment as full satisfaction was held to be "unheard in law," as the entire assessed tax is payable unless an amnesty scheme applies. The Court held that "recourse to Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not proper" in the absence of invoking statutory remedies, and accordingly dismissed the petition without prejudice to remedies under the Act.