Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity Law of Limitation Binds All Equally, Including the State: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Review Petition with 5743 Days’ Delay Once Selected, All Are Equals: Allahabad High Court Slams State for Withholding Pay Protection From Later Batches of Ex-Servicemen Constables Non-Compliance With Section 42 of NDPS Act Is Fatal to Prosecution: Punjab & Haryana High Court Acquits Two Accused In 160 Kg Poppy Husk Case Unregistered Agreement Creating Right of Way Inadmissible in Evidence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Summary Decree in Partition Suit Denied: Unequivocal Admissions Absent, Full Trial Necessary: Delhi High Court No Court Can Allow Itself to Be Used as an Instrument of Fraud: Delhi High Court Exposes Forged Writ Petition Filed in Name of Unaware Citizen "Deliberate Wage Splitting to Evade Provident Fund Dues Is Illegal": Bombay High Court Restores PF Authority's 7A Order Against Saket College and Centrum Direct Anti-Suit Injunction in Matrimonial Dispute Set Aside: Calcutta High Court Refuses to Stall UK Divorce Proceedings Filed by Wife

Kerala High Court Voids Property Tax Demand Notices on Telecom Towers for Exceeding Limitation Period”

15 November 2024 3:12 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


High Court Sets Aside Demand Notices, Directs Municipalities to Reassess Within Statutory Time Frame

In a significant ruling, the High Court of Kerala has set aside property tax demand notices issued by various municipalities to ATC Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. For telecom towers, citing that the demands were beyond the statutory limitation period. The judgment, delivered by Justice Murali Purushothaman, mandates the municipalities to issue fresh notices for tax assessment within the permissible time frame, ensuring compliance with Sections 282 and 539 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994.

ATC Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (formerly known as Wireless TT Info Service Ltd., Essar Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., and Viom Networks Ltd.) filed multiple writ petitions challenging the property tax demand notices issued by various municipalities. These notices were related to telecom towers installed within the municipalities’ jurisdictions. The primary contention was that the demands were made beyond the limitation period specified in the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994.

The court focused on the statutory limitations prescribed under Sections 282 and 539 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. Section 282 allows the assessment of escaped tax within four years from the date the person should have been assessed, while Section 539 bars recovery of tax beyond three years from the date of assessment. The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to these statutory time frames for valid tax assessment and recovery.

Justice Murali Purushothaman noted, “Going by Section 282 of the Kerala Municipality Act, the assessment of tax for a period could be done within four years from the last date of that Assessment Year. The demand notice could have been issued within three years of making the assessment.”

The court underscored that the demands made beyond the specified periods were unenforceable. It pointed out that the assessment of property tax for escaped assessment should be within four years, and any recovery of assessed tax must be initiated within three years. The municipalities’ failure to comply with these provisions rendered their demand notices invalid.

The High Court’s decision to set aside the impugned demand notices and remit the matters to the respective municipalities for reassessment within the statutory period signifies a reinforcement of adherence to legal frameworks. This ruling is expected to streamline the process of tax assessments and recoveries, ensuring that municipal actions align with the legislative provisions.

Date of Decision: 3rd July 2024
 

Latest Legal News