9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 736X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under the aegis of petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 and petitioner No. 2 is an inseparable part of petitioner No. 1, which is duly registered and approved under Section 12A and 10 (23C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and is eligible for exemption under Chapter III of the Income Tax Act, 1961. He would further submit that though, there is a clear statutory provision under Section 136 (c) of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as '1956 Act') has exempted all the educational institutions run and operated by charitable trusts, educational institutions, which are registered under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the said institution is wholly exempted for the payment of property tax and other educational institutions may be given a rebate of up to fifty per cent of the property tax. If the petitioner No. 3 runs the institution under the aegis of petitioner No. 1, which is a registered charitable trust and also exempted under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, so the petitioner No. 3/ educational institution shall be wholly exempted. For the sake of brevity, the said provision of Section 136 (c) of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 reads as under:- "...136(c) e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Varimadugu OBI Reddy vs. B. Sreenivasulu and Others 2023(2) SCC 168, and referred paras 34 & 35 as under:- "34.The order of the Tribunal dated 1st August, 2019 was an appealable order under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and in the ordinary course of business, the borrowers/person aggrieved was supposed to avail the statutory remedy of appeal which the law provides under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 in the absence of efficacious alternative remedy being availed, there was no reasonable justification tendered by the respondent borrowers in approaching the High Court and filing writ application assailing order of the Tribunal dated 1st August, 2019 under its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution without exhausting the statutory right of appeal available at its command. 35. This Court in the judgment in United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon & Others, was concerned with the argument of alternative remedy provided under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and dealing with the argument of alternative remedy, this Court had observed that where an effective remedy is available to an aggrieved person, the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lication, appeal, revision, etc. and the particular legislation contains a detailed mechanism for redressal of his grievance." 5. Learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 1 would further submit that under the statutory appellate provision, there is mandatory requirement of pre-deposit of the notice of the demand amount, the petitioner only with an intention to not to deposit the aforesaid amount, directly approached this High Court in a shortcut method, which is not permissible in law. She would further submit that when the statutory requirement of pre-deposit for availing the appellate remedy is enacted by the legislature, the same is mandatory in nature and for this proposition, she would rely upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Narayan Chandra Ghosh vs. Uco Bank and others 2011 (4) SCC 548, and the relevant para is 8, which reads as under:- "8. It is well settled that when a statute confers a right of appeal, while granting the right, the legislature can impose conditions for the exercise of such right, so long as the conditions are not so onerous as to amount to unreasonable restrictions, rendering the right almost illusory. Bearing in mind the object ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n not having availed the alternative remedy provided by the statue, the same reads as under:- "(i). where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights; (ii) where there is violation of principal of natural justice (iii) where the order of the proceedings are wholly without the jurisdiction or the vires of an act is challenged." 8. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, it is explicit that petitioner No. 3/educational institution continuously raised the objection, the said institution is under the exempted category under Section under Section 136 (c) of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as '1956 Act') and there is a specific procedure if any such objection has been raised about the valuation of the property tax that the Commissioner shall give a notice in writing to the objector of the time and place at which his objection will be investigated and after giving the opportunity of personal hearing to the objector, any such objection has been determined, when a query has been put to the learned Senior Counsel, from the record, it is explicit that no such procedure has been followed, though the legislature in clear terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
