Karnataka High Court
THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL V. AKBAR PATEL
WRIT PETITION NO. 87922 OF 2012 (LB-TAX)
Bench- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Decided On 23-05-2023
Facts of the case-
The petitioner, formerly known as the City Municipal Council and now upgraded to a Municipal Corporation, is dissatisfied with the decision made by the II Additional Sessions Judge in Crl.Revision Petition No.139/2012, which pertains to the petitioner’s demand for payment of arrears of municipal tax. The petitioner operated as a City Municipal Council under the provisions of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (referred to as ‘the Act of 1964’).
On January 11, 2012, the petitioner issued a demand notice under Section 142(1)(v) of the Act of 1964, requesting the respondent to pay outstanding municipal taxes amounting to Rs. 38,79,674/- for the period spanning from April 1, 2002, to March 31, 2012.
The respondent, feeling aggrieved, filed an appeal (Crl.Appeal No.134/2012) under Section 150 of the Act of 1964 before JMFC-I, Bijapur. However, the appeal was dismissed due to a delay in its filing and the respondent’s failure to obtain an exemption from the City Municipal Council for the aforementioned period.
In response to the dismissal of the appeal, the respondent filed a Criminal Revision Petition No.139/2012, which was subsequently allowed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Bijapur. The judge ruled that, in accordance with Section 94(1-A)(i) of the Act of 1964, the respondent, being an educational institution, was exempted from paying property taxes.
Consequently, the City Municipal Council, feeling aggrieved by this decision, has approached this Court seeking the aforementioned reliefs.
Judgement
The court has rendered a judgment stating that according to Section 94(1-A)(i) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, an educational institution is exempted from paying property taxes. The court clarified that there is no requirement for the institution to obtain an exemption certificate annually. This exemption applies to all buildings used for educational purposes and related activities.
Upon reviewing Section 94(1-A)(i), the bench concluded that no certificate is necessary, as argued by the petitioner, for claiming exemption under this provision of the Act. However, for exemptions mentioned under Section 94(1-A)(a, c, and d) of the Act, certain conditions must be fulfilled. Additionally, for exemption under Section 94(1-A)(j) of the Act, a certificate must be issued by the Government or an authorized officer, confirming that a building or vacant land belonging to the Central or State Government is utilized for State Government purposes and not for residential or commercial use. Neither Section 94(1) nor Section 94(1-A) of the Act requires any certificate to be issued by any authority.
Based on these findings, the court dismissed the petition and affirmed that the Revisional Court rightly applied Section 94(1-A)(i) of the Act to revise the order passed by the JMFC-I, Bijapur, exempting the respondent from paying property tax as an educational institution.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY ABHAY SHUKLA
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
