NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE versus LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

Citation: [1978] 1 S.C.R. 279 · Decided: 09-08-1977 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

' 
• 
-.-
• 
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE 
v. 
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA 
August 9, 1977 
\ 
(Y. V. CHANDRACHUD AND P. S. KAILASAM, JJ.J 
279 
Punjab Municipal Act, 1911--Ss. 66, 67 and 68A scope of-Certain pro-
perty escaped asses.1n1e1U for five years-Power of Afunicfpal Conu11illec to 
revise assess111ent-lf exists~'At any tfnu:' meaning of. 
A 
B 
Section 66 of the Punjab h-funicipal Act, 1911 (which is the Act in force 
in the New Delhi Municipal Area) prescribing the procedure for revision of 
the valuation and assessment of property provides that "subject to such a1nend-
ments as may thereafter be duly made the tax so assessed shall be deemed to 
be the tax for the year con1mencing on the first day of January or first day of 
C 
April next ensuing as the Committee may determine." Section 67(1) provides 
that the Committee may 'at any time' amend lhe list by altering the assessment 
on any property which has been erroneously valued or assessed through fraud, 
accident or mistake whether on the part of the Committee or of the asscssee, 
after following the procedure prescribed therein. Section 68A which deals \vith 
power to amend an assessment list in certain cases provides that where the 
prescribed authority is satisfied that any property has been erroneously valued 
or 
assessed through fraud, accident or mistake, whether on the part of the 
committee or of the as5essee, it may pass an order amending the assessment 
D 
already made and fixing the amount of tax payahle for that property and on the 
issue of such an order the assessment list then in force shall be deemed to 
have been amended accordingly with effect from first day of January or fin~t 
day of April or first day of July or first day of October next follo~'ing the 
month in which the order is passed. 
In January, 1968 the appellant Municipal Committee issued a notice to the 
respondent stating that it had decided to amend the lists of assessment for five 
E 
years (1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67. 1967-68) on the gcound that the 
rent of a portion of the basement of the building had e&caped inclusion in the 
respective lists. 
The respondent's writ petition was allowed by the High Court holding that 
the assessment lists together with the amendments, if any, could only operate 
prospectively in and for the fina11cial year next following and 
not 
for any 
praiou~ year. 
Allowing the appeal, 
HELD : The Full Bench of the High Court was wrong in its conclusion 
that the expression 'at any time' in s. 67 has reference only to the paint_ of 
time when the list could be amended. 
[286HJ 
1 (a) That the amended list operates prospectively is correct because the 
amendment is made to the original list and that list has prospective operation. 
Each assessment list is effective for the ensuing year, so that the list settled 
F 
before 31st of March operates for the vear commencing with the ensuing 1st 
G 
of April and ending with the 31st of March following, 
But the list in force 
for such an ensuring year can under s. 67 be amended at any time \vil'h the 
re~ult that when a list which was finalised say on March 25, 1970 is aniendPd 
in August 1973, the amendment becomes effective for the year for which the 
1ist itself was effective, that is to say, for the year April 1, 1970 to March 31. 
1971. 
The words "next ensuing" which occur in s. 66 cannot b,, correlated 
to the date of the amendment so as to mean "the year next ensuing after the 
year in which the amendment is made". 
This reasoning overlooks the true 
purpose and purport of the Committee's oower to amend a list at any time and 
H 
rob! that power of its meaningful content. 
[286E-G] 
(b) The Committee's power to amend an a~sessment list is not. Iim5ted bv 
the consideration that the list has already become final by authentication. It 
A 
280 
SUPRE£.'1E COURT REPORTS 
[1978] 1 S.C.Jt. 
bas the power to amend a list even after it is finalised and has alread.f come 
iato force. 
That is the important effect and implication of the expressian •at 
any time." 
[284A-B] 
(c) It may be true to s.ay that the power ought to be exercised \Yit.b.in a 
r.easonable time since the use of expression of a wide amplitude like 'at any 
hme'. does not exclude the concept of reasonableness. 
Subject to that consi~ 
deratlon, the power of amendment can be exercised even after Lhe expiry of ttic 
B 
year for which the list is to remain in force. 
[284D] 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
2(a) The reason why the Legi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.