9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1856X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Mr. P.B. Balaji For the Respondents : Mr. T.C. Gopalakrishnan, Standing Counsel ORDER Mr. T.C. Gopalakrishnan, learned standing takes notice for the respondents. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved against the proceedings of the 2nd respondent date 30.08.2018, wherein and whereby, the request of the petitioner seeking exemption to the petitioner from paying the property tax under section 101(E) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e impugned order, based on such delegated power. 6. It is seen that the petitioner has filed a writ petition earlier in W.P.No.25872 of 2003, challenging the demand notice dated 24.02.2003 as well as a communication that the petitioner is not exempted from payment of property tax under section 101(E) of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919. The said writ petition was disposed of on 02. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner as has been done in this case. Therefore, on this short ground, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the first respondent for passing order on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the respecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
