LexADMINISTRATOR, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BILASPUR versus DATTATRAYA DAHANKAR, ADVOCATE AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
c
D
E
F
ADMINISTRATOR, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, BILASPUR
v.
DATTATRAYA DAHANKAR, ADVOCATE AND ANR.
DECEMBER 5, 1991
[K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, R.M. SARAI AND
YOGESHW AR DAY AL, JJ.)
Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 :
Section-127A-lmposition of property tax-Aggregation of annual let-
ting value of all buildings owned by single individual-To be taken as one unit
for purpose of taxation-Exemption provided by sub-section 2 ( b) not available
in such cases.
On the construction of section 127 A of the Madhya Pradesh Munici·
palities Act, 1961, relating to imposition of Property Tax, the High Court
held that each tenement was to be separately assessed and no tax could
be levied for a building with annual letting value of Rs. 1000. The High
Court also held that if a person owns more than one building, the
aggregate annual value of all the buildings cannot be taken into considera·
tion for assessment of tax ; And that if the annual letting value of each
quarter not exceeding the limit prescribed, it would be exempt- from
assessment.
Aggrieved against the said order of the High Court, the appellant·
Municipal Corporation preferred the present appeal.
Allowing the appeal, this Court,
HELD : 1.1 The High Court's mechanical approach to construction
is altogether out of step with the modern positive approach. The modern
positive approach is to have a purposeful construction that is to effectuate
the object and purpose of the Act. Section 127 A of the Madhya Pradesh
G Municipalities Act, 1961, must therefore, receive a purposeful construe·
tion. There is no provision for taxation in respect of a building having
annual letting value less than rupees eighteen hundred. Clause (b) of sub-
section (2) expressly exempts buildings and lands, the annual Jetting value
of which does not exceed eighteen hundred rupees. The proviso permits
adding up of annual letting value of all such buildings or lands owned by
H a single individual in the Municipality. But the purpose of the proviso is
to deny exemption to buildings or lands owned by the same person.
[115 D-F]
112
.t
.....
j
'"
I
~
' t
~
-'t
,..
f
•
MUNICIPALCORPN. v. DAITATRAYADAHANKAR [SHEITY,J.]
113
1.2 It is quite clear that each building is a unit for the purpose of A
taxation and there is no provision for taxation of building and land of
whiGh the annual letting value is up to rupees eighteen hundred. But when
aggregation of annual letting value of all buildings or lands is permitted,
then all such buildings or lands have to be taken as one unit for the
purpose of taxation. Any other construction ·would render the proviso
nugatory and defeat the object of the Act. [115 G-HJ
B
2. It is directed that this decision should be given effect to prospec-
tively and there shall not be recovery from or refund to any person With
regard to the period antecede~t thereto. [116-B]
CIVIL APPELLA1E JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 793 of 1982. C
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.4.1981 of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court in Civil Revision No. 535 of 1980.
S.S.Khanduja and Y.P.Dhingra for the Appellant.
D
Ranjit Kumar for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was deliverect by
K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J.-The question raised in this appeal ,,. . /
relates to .the construction of Section 127 A of the Madhya Pradesh Municipali-
E
ties Act, 1961, ('The Act'). The relevant portion of section 127A reads:
(i)
(ii)
"127 A. Imposition of Property Tax-{l) Notwithstanding any-
thing contained in this Chapter, as and from the financial year
1976-77, there shall be charged, levied and paid for each financial F
year a tax on the lands or buildings or both situate in a Municipality
other than· class IV Municipality at the rate specified in the table
below:
TABLE
Where the annual letting
6 per centum ofthe
GI
value exceeds Rs. 1800 but
annual letting value
does not exceed Rs. 6000
Where the annual letting
81/3 per centum
value exceeds Rs. 6000 ·
of the annual
but does not exceed
letting value
E
Rs. 12000
A
B
c
D
E
F
114
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1991] SUPP. 3 S. C.R.
Where the annual letting
10 per centum of the
value exceeds Rs. 12000 but
annual letting
does not exceed Rs. 18,000
value
Where the annual letting
15 per centum of the
value exceeds Rs. 1800 but
annual letting
does not exceed Rs. 24,000
value
Where the annual letting
20 per centum of the
value exceeds Rs. 24,000
annual letExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.