Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2007 (7) TMI 710

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssing the aforesaid flats having market value of Rs. 28]70]700/-. After deducting a sum of Rs. 1 lac from market value at which no tax was payable, the assessing authority held the taxable market value of the aforesaid flats at Rs. 27]70]700/- and determined tax at Rs. 26]060/-. (ii) On 15-4-1991]the Director, Land Building Tax issued a Circular that the flats in multi-storied buildings should be assessed in accord with the said Circular by treating the flats at one floor as one unit. (iii) In the light of the said Circular dated 15-4-1991, a rectification order came to be issued by the assessing authority under Section 22A of the Rajasthan Lands Buildings Tax Act, 1964 (for short, LBT Act ) in respect of the aforesaid flats owned by Bharat Petroleum on 27-7-1991. By rectification order, the assessing authority treated the petitioners' flats in 'Kamal Apartment' in four units on the basis of the Circular dated 15-4-1991. On the basis of total market value of all the units as on 1-4-1989, the land building tax was determined. (iv) Dissatisfied with the order dated 27-7-1991, Bharat Petroleum preferred revision petition before the Divisional Commissi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on (1) of Section 66 or the second proviso to section 67 of the said Act. (5) 'Land' means land which is, or is capable of being used as a building site, and includes garden or ground appurtenant to a building but does not include a holding as defined in the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (Rajasthan Act 3 of 1955) provided the improvement referred to in sub-clause (a) of clause (19) of section 5 of the said Act over such holding does not exceed such area as has been prescribed for purposes of the second proviso to sub-sec. (1) of Section 66 or the second Proviso to section 67 of the said Act. 6. Section 2(8) (10) define the expression occupier owner . It reads thus:- (8) 'Occupier means the person in actual occupation or use of the [land or building' or a portion thereof, in respect of which the tax is payable and includes- (a) the owner in occupation. (b) the tenant who for the time being is paying or is liable to pay rent in respect thereof to the owner, (c) the rent free tenant or licence thereof, and (d) the person who is liable to pay to the owner damages for unauthorised use and occupation thereof. (10) 'O .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... epartment it has been advised that the definition of 'building' as given in Sec. 3 of Rajasthan Lands Buildings Tax Act, 1964 includes a portion of building, so also the definition of 'Owner' as given in Sec. 2(10), is with reference to land or building or portion thereof. Again the definition of 'occupier' as given in Sec. 2(8) of the said Act is also with reference to land building or portion thereof. Further, there is no provision in the said Act for a consolidated assessment of a building separately owned possessed by different owners and for appointment of the tax so assessed so as to enable recovery from different co-owners. Hence the scheme of the Act, along with the definition referred above, all lead to the irresistible conclusion that a portion of a building owned and possessed separately by different persons is a different unit for the purpose of assessment under said Act. CIRCULAR NO. 27/74 Sd/- S.L. JOSHI Director Lands Buildings Tax Deptt., Rajasthan, Jaipur. 10. The State Government itself looked into the question whether different portions of a building occupied by different persons form differ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssible to have one house built over another house, then all that has been held to constitute a separate house exists here: there is nothing which is held in common; the one structure is superposed upon the other, and that is all. 14. Our own Supreme Court in the case of TATA Engineering Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs. Gram Panchayat, Pimpri Waghere : AIR 1976 SC 2463 while dealing with the expression 'Houses Lands' used in Section 89 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1933 accorded approval to the aforesaid observations made in the cases of Yorkshire Fire Life Insurance Company and Grant. In paragraph 15 of the report, the Supreme Court observed thus:- Formerly houses were built so that each house occupied a separate site. In modern times a practice has grown up of putting separate houses one above the other. They are built in separate flats or storeys. For legal and ordinary purposes they are separate houses. Each is separately let and separately occupied. One has no connection with those above or below, except in so far as it may derive support from those below instead of from the ground, as in the case of ordinary houses. (See Yorkshire Fire Life Insurance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... common wall could be treated as a separate building for the purposes of property tax, in our considered view the flat constructed above flat in a multi-storied building or the flats on the same floor of a multi-storied building though having common wall, would be a separate building for the purpose of LBT Tax. 18. More than hundred years ago, Earl of Halsbury L.C. stated in the case of Grant vs. Langston that the word house has acquired an artificial meaning. The word is no longer the expression of a simple idea; but to ascertain its meaning one must understand the subject matter with respect to which it is used in order to arrive at the sense in which it is employed in a statute. Each flat in a multi-storied building is a separate occupation and is a separate place of dwelling and habitation with the separate entry. 19. Seen thus, it is difficult to uphold the contention of State that group of flats in a multi-shored building owned by one person constitute one 'building' within the meaning of Section 2(3). For all legal and ordinary purposes, each separate flat in a multi-storied building would constitute a separate house or for that matter a separate building .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates