Delhi High Court
Prem Chand Gupta vs Municipal Corportion Of Delhi & ... on 23 February, 2010
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
33.
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1113/2010
PREM CHAND GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. B.S. Chowdhary, Advocate.
versus
M.C.D.& ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 23.02.2010
1. Property No. D-44, Ashoka Road, Adarsh Nagar Extension, Delhi was
assessed to property tax and rateable value was fixed at Rs.2,42,710/- per annum
vide assessment order dated 26th June, 1998 with effect from 1st April, 1997. At
that time, Mr. Amit Malik and Ms. Meenu Narula were owners of the property and
had entered appearance. The said assessment order records that the property was
being used for semi commercial purposes and the total cost of construction as per
the valuation report submitted by Mr. Amit Malik and Ms. Meenu Narula was
Rs.11,27,810/-. This valuation report was submitted as the said owners had made
addition/alternation on the ground floor and had constructed first floor, second
floor and third floor after purchasing the property. The assessment order further
records that the said Mr. Amit Malik and Ms. Meenu Narula had purchased the
land for Rs.75,000/- and had paid another amount of Rs.75,000/- towards the built
up area. The Assessing Officer observed that the consideration declared was
abnormally low and he fixed the market value of land on the date of sale at
Rs.12,600/- per square meter. This assessment order was not an ex parte
assessment order, but was passed in the presence of father of Mr. Amit Malik.
2. It appears that in 2001, Mr. Amit Malik made a representation that the rate
of the land taken at Rs.12,600/- per square meter was high and this should be
WPC No.1113/2010 Page 1
reduced. Thereafter, it appears that internal file noting were made for reduction of
rate of the land to Rs.9,450/- per square meter. However, no rectification order
was passed. There was no challenge to the assessment order and the same was
allowed to become final.
3. The petitioner thereafter purchased this property pursuant to auction held
by State Bank of India on 27th December, 2005. The petitioner thereupon decided
to challenge and question the assessment order dated 26th June, 1998 fixing the
rateable value of the property at Rs.2,42,710/- with effect from 1st April, 1997. It
appears that on 3rd April, 2007 a rectification order was passed on the basis of
internal notings dated 27th January, 2001, 30th January, 2001 and 2nd February,
2001 and the rateable value was reduced to Rs.2,05,570/- with effect from 1st
April, 1997. Obviously this order was passed at the behest of the petitioner as
admittedly he had purchased the property on 27th December, 2005.
4. The petitioner thereafter filed an appeal before the Municipal Taxation
Tribunal challenging the order dated 3rd April, 2007. In the garb of challenging
the said order, the petitioner in fact wanted to challenge the order dated 26th June,
1998 fixing the rateable value of the property.
5. Learned tribunal has rightly held that the petitioner cannot challenge and
question order dated 26th June, 1998 after a lapse of more than ten years. The said
order was allowed to become final and binding.
6. Mr. Amit Malik, owner of the property had appeared and had asked for
reduction of rate of rent in the year, 2001. On the basis of his representation, the
respondent had made internal notings dated 27th January, 2001, 30th January,
2001and 2nd February, 2001 that the rate of rent should be taken as Rs.9,260/-
instead of Rs.12,600/-. However, no rectification order or any other
communication was addressed either the earlier co-owners or the petitioner. After
the petitioner became owner of the property, he obviously was instrumental in
getting the rectification order dated 3rd April, 2007 passed. The said order in fact
accepts the plea and contention of the erstwhile owner to reduce the value of land
to Rs.9,450/- per square meter.
7. Learned tribunal has rightly held that the power of rectification is not
WPC No.1113/2010 Page 2
synonymous with power of appellate forum in repeal. The present case was not of
an ex parte assessment. The assessment order dated 26th June, 1998 cannot be
reviewed or recalled on merits in absence of any statutory provision. Therefore, it
has been rightly held that the order dated 3rd April, 2007 cannot furnish any fresh
ground to the petitioner to challenge and question the order dated 26th June, 1998.
Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is
dismissed.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
FEBRUARY 23, 2010
VKR/NA
WPC No.1113/2010 Page 3
