Madras High Court
V.S.B.Engineering College vs / on 3 June, 2024
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
W.P.(MD) No.6888 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.(MD) No.6888 of 2022
and
W.M.P.(MD) Nos.5292 and 5295 of 2022
V.S.B.Engineering College,
rep. by its Principal,
V.Nirmal Kannan,
Karudayampalayam Post,
K.Paramathi,
Pugalur Taluk,
Karur. ... Petitioner
/vs./
1.The District Collector,
Office of the Collectorate,
Karur.
2.The Assistant Director of Panchayat,
Rural Development Department,
Karur.
3.The President,
Karudayampalayam Panchayat,
Karur. ... Respondents
1/26
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.6888 of 2022
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining the impugned
order of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.Nil dated Nil.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar
For R1 & R2 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
For R3 : Mr.P.Subbaraj
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner has challenged the impugned communication dated Nil of
the third respondent seeking to recover a sum of Rs.55,09,714/- as arrears of
property tax under Section 171 read with Section 172 of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994 for the period from 2013-14 to 2021-22.
2.This is a third round of litigation before this Court. Earlier, the petitioner
had filed the following Writ Petitions for the following relief:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Sl. W.P.(MD)No. Prayer
No.
1 7555/2013 Seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records
relating to the impugned demand notice dated 08.04.2013 of the third
respondent in respect of the petitioner Institution's Tax Assessment
No.573 for its building situated at Karudayampalayam, Karur 639 111,
Karur District, and quash the same.
2 11267/2013 Seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records
relating to the demand notice dated 06.06.2013 of the third respondent
and quash the same.
3 16307/2013 Seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for 2013 the records
relating to the demand notice of the third respondent dated Nil, served
on the petitioner on 27.08.2013 under Assessment No.573 and quash
the same.
4 644/2015 Seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records
relating to the proceedings of the third respondent herein, viz. the
demand dated 29.12.2014 in respect of the Petitioner Institution's Tax
Assessment No.573 for its building situate at Karudayampalayam,
Karur 639 111, Karur District.
3. By a common order dated 20.09.2017, these four Writ Petitions were
disposed of with the following observation:-
"10. Therefore, following the judgment of the Full
Bench judgment of this Court (cited supra), while declining
to interfere with the impugned demand notices, these writ
petitions are disposed of, directing the third respondent to re-
do the entire exercise in respect of levy of Taxes insofar as
the petitioner-College is concerned and issue fresh demand
notices, if need be, after affording an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner-college. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4.The specific case of the petitioner is that the above directions of this
Court dated 20.09.2017 has not been complied with by the respondents.
Therefore, the impugned demand has to go.
5.That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondents are only entitled to recover tax and there is no machinery prescribed
under Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, for imposing or levying surcharge.
6.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Sections 167 and
168 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 stood repealed by the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 12 of 2009) with effect from
06.08.2009. It is therefore, submitted that in the absence of any statutory backing
to levy surcharge, the question of imposing surcharge on the petitioner does not
arise.
7.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the surcharge,
which has been demanded by the third respondent, cannot be sustained, as
Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 stood deleted with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
effect from 06.08.2009. Therefore, the demand is un-sustainable. That apart, it is
submitted that a procedure has been prescribed for demanding property tax under
Section 172(3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.
8.In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed
reliance on the decision rendered by this Court on 20.06.2022 in the case of Good
Shepherd Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Rep. by the
Correspondent, Nungambakkam, Chennai vs. The Secretary, Department of
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department and others
[W.P.No.34104 of 2019 etc. batch].
9.The learned counsel for the petitioner specifically drew the attention of
this Court to Paragraph Nos. 12 and 17 of the said decision, wherein it was held
as under:-
"12. They also argue that the present arguments, to the
effect that the State does not have the power to levy a
surcharge, were not raised at the first instance and hence,
they are not liable to be taken into account now. That may
well be so. However, the issue raised is a legal one and thus,
the fact that it has been raised only in the writ petition for
the first time, is my view, is in order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
17. The foundation upon which any levy rests is the
authority under which it has been imposed. The proposition
that the levy of interest has to be supported by a substantive
position in the statute, has been settled by the Constitution
Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
J.K.Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer [1994
(94) STC 422 (SC)]. The ratio decidendi has been reiterated
in India Carbon Ltd. Vs. State of Assam [106 STC 460]."
10.Rule 6 of the aforesaid Rules reads as under:-
"6. Basis of levy of house-tax.-
(1) Every Village Panchayat shall have power to
assess the levy and collect the house-tax on the basis
referred to under Section 172 of the Act and in accordance
with the other provisions of the Act. The Village Panchayat
concerned shall decide on the basis of plinth area of house at
the rate specified in Schedule I of the Act subject to provision
of sub-section (3) of Section 172 of the Act.
(2) House-tax shall be levied by the Village Panchayat
either on half-yearly or on annual basis as notified by the
Government as per sub- section (3) of the Section 172 of the
Act.
(3) Any house-tax so levied shall not be altered or
modified during the period of assessment year except with
the prior approval of the Inspector:
Provided that, no such prior approval of the inspector
is required if the enhancement of the tax is ordered by the
Village Panchayat under sub- rule (1) of Rule 3."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11.Rule 14 of the said Rules deals with general revision of Assessment
Book.
12.It is submitted that earlier the tax was levied at the rate of Rs.1/- per
sq.ft., and that the Panchayat had passed a resolution on 15.03.2010 in its
resolution No.208 by reducing the rate of tax from Rs.1/- to 0.75 paisa. This
resolution has not been altered. In any event, even if it has been altered, the same
has not been communicated to the petitioner and therefore, the property tax
demanded under Section 172 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 is un-
sustainable.
13.The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the
decision of this Court rendered on 20.06.2022 in W.P.No.34104 of 2019 and
batch (Good Shepherd Matriculation Higher Secondary School Vs. The
Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration and Water Supply
Department, Chennai and others). Specifically, a reference was made to para 13
to 18, which reads as under:-
“13.I find that Gazette Notification dated 07.03.2018 does make
reference to Section 172 of the Panchayats Act which, in my considered
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
view, is misplaced. Section 172 falls under Chapter IX of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994 that deals with ‘taxation and finance’. It provides
for the levy of a house tax on every house in every panchayat / village
and does not refer to surcharge per se. However, it refers to the rates
that are specified in Schedule – I, on the basis of which, the taxes are to
be levied.
14.This takes us to Schedule – I that classifies properties into
concrete houses, tiled houses, attached houses above 20 Sq.mts and
attached houses below 20 Sq.mts. There are two explanations below. The
first explanation is irrelevant for the purposes of this Writ Petition. The
second explanation classifies properties as purely residential, simple
commercial like petty shops and other small commercial establishments
and large commercial, such as industrial and business establishments,
cinema theaters, hostels, lodges etc. The third limb of this explanation
talks of a surcharge of 60%.
15.Evidently, this is what has been borrowed in the draft Gazette
Notification, though dropped in the final notification. In so far as the
final notification does not refer to the Panchayats Act, there is no
necessity to dwell any further on this aspect. Perhaps the reason for
omission is that the provision under which surcharge was
contemplated, Section 168, was itself deleted with effect from 06.08.2009
and thus, the sustenance sought to be drawn from the aforesaid
provision, loses all force.
16.That apart, incidentally, I have my own doubts as to whether an
educational establishment would come under the description of
commercial, industrial and business establishments, Cinema theaters,
Hostels, Lodges, etc., of the Panchayats Act. Be that as it may, the fact
remains that the Act does not have any provision enabling or
contemplating the levy of surcharge and there is no reference to
surcharge anywhere in the Act.
17.The foundation upon which any levy rests is the authority under
which it has been imposed. The proposition that the levy of interest has
to be supported by a substantive position in the statute, has been settled
by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of J.K.Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Commercial Taxes Officer [1994 (94) STC 422
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(SC)]. The ratio decidendi has been reiterated in India Carbon Ltd. Vs.
State of Assam [106 STC 460].
18. In that case, the issue related to the charging of interest on
delayed payment of Central Sales Tax in terms of the Sales Tax Act,
1956. However, the Bench repelled the levy accepting the contention that
while Section 9(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 enabled the
framing of assessment, reassessment, collection and enforcement of
demand of Central sales tax as well as penalty, a statutory provision
enabling the levy of interest on delayed payments was conspicuous by its
absence.”
14.That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner would refer to Rule
30(3) of the aforesaid Rules, which reads as under:-
“30(3).No tax for any year or half-years whichever is applicable
shall be recovered from any person in the manner laid down in Rule 31
unless the bill is served upon such person either within that year or half-
years or in the succeeding year or half-years whichever is applicable.
Provided that where the Assessment Book has been amended under Rule
3, the bill may be served either in the year or half years whichever is
applicable in which the amendment was made or in the succeeding year
or half year whichever is applicable.
15.It is further submitted that the demand has to go, as the colleges located
in a remote village and therefore, the levy of property tat at the rate of Rs.1/- is
itself un-justified. The learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention to
the Rule 7(4) of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat (Assessment and Collection of
Taxes) Rules, 1999.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
16.It is submitted that before passing the resolution, imposing the tax for
the first time or increasing the rate of an existing tax, the village Panchayat has to
publish a notice in atleast one Tamil Newspaper and also on the notice board of
the office of the Village Panchayat and in such other places within the Village
Panchayat limits. It is therefore submitted that the impugned demand is liable to
be quashed.
17.That apart, it is submitted that the order passed by this Court on
20.09.2017 in W.P.(MD) Nos.7555 of 2013 and batch (V.S.B.Engineering
College, rep. by its Secretary, Karur Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its
Secretary, Rural Development Department, Chennai and others), has not been
fully complied with. Instead, the demand has been made for the period staring
from 2013-14 to 2021-22 for a sum of Rs.55,09,714/-, out of which 60% is
towards the surcharge, even though Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994, stood deleted with effect from 06.08.2019.
18.It is therefore submitted that the demand, which was surcharged after a
lapse of 8 years, is un-sustainable and is therefore liable to be quashed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
19.Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents
would submit that there is no merit in the submission of the learned counsel for
the petitioner. It is submitted that though Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994, stood deleted by the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Fourth
Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 12 of 2009) with effect from 06.08.2009, the levy of
property tax i.e., house tax is under Section 172 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats
Act, 1994 and therefore cannot be questioned.
20.The learned Special Government Pleader has reiterated the averments
made in Paragraphs 4 to 7 of the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent
and also relied on the decision of this Court rendered on 18.08.2021 in the case of
SSM College of Engineering, Rep. by its Administrative Officer,
Komarapalayam, Namakkal District vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department,
Chennai and another [W.P.No.25014 of 2016].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
21.The facts on record indicate that the petitioner has not questioned the
levy of tax. It is the case of the petitioner that the levy of tax at Rs.1/- per sq.ft.,
without cancellation of the order dated 18.03.2010 is un-sustainable.
22.It is submitted that the tax is to be levied in accordance with the
Schedule - I of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. Specifically, the learned
Special Government Pleader would draw the attention to Explanation - II to
Schedule - I of the said Act, wherein the levy of surcharge was with reference to
the use of the building and the Rule was specified as below:
Sl. Class of usage Rate of
No. surcharge
(i) Purely residential. Village Panchayats Nil
(ii) Simple commercial like petty
shops and other small commercial Village Panchayats 20%
establishments
(iii) Largely commercial, industrial
and business establishments, Village Panchayats 60%
Cinema theatres, Hostels, Lodges
etc.,
23.That apart, the learned Special Government Pleader would also refer to
Section 176 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, wherein has been stated
that no exemption from the payment of any surcharge tax specified in Section 171
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
shall be granted by the Village Panchayat except in accordance with the rules as
may be prescribed. It is submitted that surcharge has not been exempted.
24.Defending the impugned demand, the learned Special Government
Pleader for the respondents would submit that Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil
Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, which stood deleted by the Tamil Nadu Panchayats
(Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 12 of 2009) with effect from 06.08.2009
related to local cess and local cess surcharge and that local cess and local cess
surcharge are different from the surcharge, which is levied and demanded under
Section 172(1) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 r/w Schedule – I of the
said Act. Specifically, a reference is made to explanation 1 and 2, which reads as
under:-
“Explanation-1:- In respect of buildings which are partly
concrete terraced, tiled or thatched, the rates applicable to the
respective categories as above shall be applicable for the portions
covered by each kind:
Provided that in respect of buildings the plinth area of
which does not exceed 18.58 square metres and which are fully
concrete, terraced or tiled, or partly concrete terraced or tiled,
house-tax shall be levied at a flat rate of rupees twenty per half
year.
Explanation-II:- The use of the building may be classified
and surcharge shall be levied on the levy of house-tax at the rates
specified below:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.No. Class of Usage Rate of surcharge
(i) Purely residential Village Panchayats Nil
(ii) Simple commercial like petty shops and Village Panchayats 20%
other small commercial establishments.
(iii) Largely commercial, industrial and Village Panchayats 60%
business establishments, Cinema
theatres, Hostels. Lodges etc.
Provided that in respect of buildings used partly as residential
and partly as commercial, industrial, etc. purposes the rate of
surcharge applicable to the respective categories as above shall be
applicable for the portions covered by each class of usage:
Provided further that Educational Institutions (not commercial in
nature) exempted from levy of house-tax immediatey before the
commencement of this Act, shall continue to be exempted under this
Act.”
25.That apart, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents
would rely on the decision of this Court rendered in W.P.No.25014 of 2016 (SSM
College of Engineering, rep. by its Administrative Officer, Namakkal Vs. The
Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development and
Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai and other) dated 18.08.2021.
26.The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that in the
context of a college, like the petitioner levy of surcharge as also the tax under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Section 172 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 r/w Schedule – I of the
aforesaid Act came up for consideration, wherein after reading the provisions of
Sections 172 and 173 of the Act, the Court has observed as under:-
“14.Close reading of Section 172 sub-section (1) would reveal
that the house tax shall be levied on the basis of classified plinth area at
the rates specified in Schedule-I, as the Village Panchayat may adopt
subject to the provisions of sub-section (3).
15.Sub-section (3) of Section 172 reads us under:
"(3) The Government shall, by notification, determine in regard
to any Panchayat Village or any class of Panchayat Villages whether
the housetax shall be levied every half-year or year and in so doing
have regard to the following matters, namely:-
(a) the classification of the local areas under Section 4;
(b) the annual receipts of the Village Panchayat;
(c) the population of the Panchayat Village and the predominant
occupation of such population; and (d) such other matters as may be
prescribed."
16.Sub-section (3) enumerates the classification of the local
areas, the annual receipts of the Village Panchayat, the population of
the Panchayat Village and such other matters as may be prescribed.
Thus, the manner in which the property tax is to be assessed or
enumerated is given under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 172 of the
Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act.
17.Relevantly, sub-section (1) to Section 172 unambiguously
stipulates that the house tax shall be levied on all houses in every
Panchayat Village on the basis of classified plinth area at the rates
specified in Schedule-I.
18.Thus, Schedule-I is to be taken into consideration for the
purpose of specification of rate. Schedule-I to the Act refers Section 172
sub-section (1) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act. Thus, Schedule-I is
relatable to Section 172 sub-section (1) of the Act. Section 172 as stated
above contemplates that tax shall be levied on the basis of the rates
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
specified in Schedule-I and Schedule-I provides classification as well as
the minimum rate per half year and maximum rate per half year,
minimum rate per year and maximum rate per year. The classification
contemplates concrete houses, Madras terraced houses, storeyard
houses, tiled houses, thatched houses 20 sq.mts and above, thatched
houses below 20 sq.mts. The rates are also prescribed for both half year
minimum and half year maximum and also for one year.
19.Explanation-I stipulates that "in respect of buildings which are
partly concrete, terraced, tiled or thatched, the rates applicable to the
respective categories as above shall be applicable for the portions
covered by each kind: provided that in respect of buildings, the plinth
area of which does not exceed 18.58 square metres and which are fully
concrete, terraced or tiled, or partly concrete, terraced or tiled, house-
tax shall be levied at a flat rate of rupees twenty per half year."
20.Explanation-II reads as under:-
"Explanation-II: The use of the building may be classified and
surcharge shall be levied on the levy of house-tax at the rates specified
below:-
S.No. Class of Usage Rate of surcharge
(i) Purely residential Village Panchayats Nil
(ii) Simple commercial like petty shops and Village Panchayats 0.20
other small commercial establishments.
(iii) Largely commercial, industrial and Village Panchayats 0.60
business establishments, Cinema
theatres, Hostels. Lodges etc.
Provided that in respect of buildings used partly as residential and
partly as commercial, industrial, etc., purposes, the rate of surcharge
applicable to the respective categories as above shall be applicable for the
portions covered by each class of usage:
Provided further that Educational Institutions (not commercial in
nature) exempted from levy of house-tax immediately before the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
commencement of this Act, shall continue to be exempted under this Act."
21.Reading of Explanation-II would reveal that “the use of the
building may be classified and surcharge shall be levied on the levy of
house tax at the rates specified. The language employed in Explanation-II
(ii) is surcharge shall be levied” and therefore, the Explanation-II (ii)
confers power on the authority competent to demand surcharge. When
Schedule-I provides classification of the property and Explanation-II
stipulates the use of building may be classified under Explanation-II and
surcharge shall be levied on the levy of house tax, there is no ambiguity in
respect of the provisions as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994.
22.Regarding the unreasonableness in demanding surcharge as
raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that,
Explanation-II(i) Schedule-I provides complete exemption to purely
residential buildings. Purely residential buildings are not liable to pay
surcharge at all. For simple commercial like petty shops and other small
commercial establishments, 20% of surcharge is specified. Only for large
commercial, industrial and business establishments, 60% of surcharge is
contemplated. Therefore, the Act has granted exemption for payment of
surcharge to pure residential buildings and prescribed 20% for simple
commercial buildings and 60% for large commercial and industrial and
business establishments. Thus, the classification made undoubtedly is
reasonable and there is no illegality or otherwise in respect of such
contemplation.”
27.It is submitted that Section 176 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994
stood amended by the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009
(Act 12 of 2009) with effect from 06.08.2009. Thus, it is submitted that there is
no scope for concluding that surcharge was payable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
28.Hence, it is submitted that the issue is no longer res integra and
therefore, the challenge to the impugned notice is without any merits.
29.I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleaders for the respondents.
30.The challenge to the impugned levy that the levy of tax including the
surcharge cannot be questioned as the surcharge contemplated under Section 168
of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 prior to its deletion with effect from
06.08.2009 vide Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 12
of 2009), is relating to local cess surcharge, as per which every person is liable to
pay the land revenue to the Government in respect of any land in the Panchayat
Union, a local cess surcharge at such rate as may be considered suitable in
addition to the local cess leviable under Section 167 of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994 could be levied. It is different from surcharge leviable
under Section 172 of the Act read with Tamil Nadu Village Panchayats
(Assessment and Collection of Taxes) Rules, 1999.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
31.Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, which
stood deleted by the aforesaid amendment Act, has already been extracted above.
Therefore, the allusion to Sections 167 and 168 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats
Act, 1994 as deleted by Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009
(Act 12 of 2009) is of no relevance.
32.At this juncture, it is relevant to refer Section 176 of the Tamil Nadu
Panchayats Act, 1994, which reads as under:-
"176. Exemption.- No exemption from the payment of
any surcharge or tax specified in Section 171 shall be
granted by the Village Panchayat except in accordance with
such rules as may be prescribed: Provided that in any
particular case, such exemption may be granted with the
previous sanction of the Government."
33.That apart, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents
would also draw the attention of this Court to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu
Village Panchayats (Assessment and Collection of Taxes) Rules, 1999 [vide
G.O.Ms.No.255, Rural Development, dated 13th December, 1999].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
34.As far as the house tax is concerned, which is essentially a property tax,
it has to be read along with Schedule – I and along with Tamil Nadu Village
Panchayat (Assessment and Collection of Taxes) Rules, 1999.
35.Sections 167, 168, which were repealed on 06.08.2009, 171, 172 and
176 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, before repeal vide Tamil Nadu
Panchayats (Fourth Amendment) Act, 2009 (Act 12 of 2009) are reproduced
under:-
In this section and in Section 168, ‘land revenue’ means Local Cess Surcharge.- Every Panchayat Union
public revenue due on land and includes water cess payable Council may levy on every person liable to pay
to the Government for water supplied or used for the land revenue to the Government in respect of any
irrigation of lands, royalty, lease amount or other sum land in the Panchayat Union, a Local Cess
payable to the Government in respect of land held direct from Surcharge at such rate as may be considered
the Government on lease or licence, but does not include any suitable as an addition to the Local Cess levied in
other cess or the surcharge payable under Section 168: Panchayat Development Block under Section 167
provided that land revenue remitted shall not be deemed to be provided that the rate of local cess surcharge so
land revenue payable for the purpose of this section. levied shall not be less than five rupees and not
more than ten rupees on every rupee of land
revenue payable in respect of such land.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Taxes leviable by Village Panchayats.- House tax.- The house tax shall be levied on all houses
(1) Every Village Panchayat shall levy in the Panchayat in every Panchayat Village on the basis on which such
Village a house-tax. tax was levied in the local area concerned immediately
(2) A Duty shall also be levied in every Panchayat before the commencement of this Act or on the basis of
Village on certain transfers of property in accordance classified plinth area at the rates specified in Schedule I,
with the provisions of Section 175. as the Village Panchayat may adopt subject to the
(3) Subject to such rules as may be prescribed and with provisions of sub- section (3).
the sanction of the Inspector and subject to such
restrictions and conditions, if any, as may be imposed by
him either at the time of granting sanction or later, the
Village Panchayat may also levy in the village, a tax on
agricultural land for a specific purpose.
Exemption.- No exemption from the payment of any surcharge or tax specified in Section 168 or 171 shall be
granted by the Village Panchayat or the Panchayat Union Council except in accordance with such rules as may be
prescribed: Provided that in any particular case, such exemption may be granted with the previous sanction of the
Government.
36.It is noticed that the aforesaid resolution was passed in the year 2010
and thereafter, the petitioner was visited the demands for the property tax (house
tax) under Section 172 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, which was the
subject matter of a writ petition in W.P.(MD) Nos.7555 of 2013 and batch
(V.S.B.Engineering College, rep. by its Secretary, Karur Vs. The State of Tamil
Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Chennai and
others), in respect of which an order came to be passed on 20.09.2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
37.Though the order called upon the respondents to re-do the exercise, the
fact remains that the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.24,75,000/-, as property tax
inclusive of the library cess and 60% surcharge as is leviable under Section 172
of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 r/w Schedule – I to the Act.
38.There are no indications that calculations were made and given by the
respondents earlier. However, the petitioner has paid the aforesaid sum for each of
the years and thus, in all a sum of Rs.24,75,000/- for the period starting from
2013-14 up to 2023-24 was paid. This is after the present writ petition was filed
on 11.04.2022.
39.The petitioner has also not given any calculations for arriving at the
aforesaid amount of Rs.24,75,000/- as tax payable by the petitioner. On the other
hand, the respondents have demanded tax at Rs.6,88,568/- per each of the
assessment years as below for each of the years.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
40.The argument that surcharge is not payable at this distant point of time
cannot be countenanced in the light of the Schedule – I to the Act. Unless the
Schedule – I is struck down as ultra vires of the provisions of the Act, the
petitioner cannot claim any exemption from surcharge leviable under Section
172(1) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 r/w Schedule – I to the Act.
41.The argument that the resolution passed by the third respondent on
15.03.2010 as communicated to the petitioner on 18.03.2010 bearing
Ref.Na.Ka.No.A2/257/2009 also cannot be the basis for claiming exemption for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
25 paisa concession/exemption for the subsequent years. The petitioner cannot
enrich itself and take advantage of the delay by the petitioner.
42.The petitioner has been litigating right from 2015 in respect of tax due
demanded by the respondents for the period prior to 2013 in W.P.(MD) Nos.7555
of 2013 and batch (V.S.B.Engineering College, rep. by its Secretary, Karur Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development Department,
Chennai and others).
43.Long after the order was passed on 20.09.2017 in the above writ
petition, the petitioner has come forward to pay tax at the rate of Rs.24,75,000/-
per annum for 9 years. The petitioner has not paid the tax for the succeeding years
as well.
44.Under these circumstances, I find no merit in this Writ Petition and
therefore, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed with a direction to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioner to pay the arrears of tax for the period up to the current year within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Index : Yes / No 03.06.2024
Internet : Yes / No
mm
To
1.The District Collector,
Office of the Collectorate,
Karur.
2.The Assistant Director of Panchayat,
Rural Development Department,
Karur.
3.The President,
Karudayampalayam Panchayat,
Karur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.SARAVANAN, J.
mm
03.06.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
