Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act Mandates 15 days' Time To Be Provided To Property Tax Assessee To Respond To Notice: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has held that Section 116A of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, mandates that 15 days' time should be provided to the property tax assessee to respond to the notice before action is taken.The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has directed the respondent department to de-seal the restaurant.The petitioner/assessee has assailed a demand notice that...
The Madras High Court has held that Section 116A of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, mandates that 15 days' time should be provided to the property tax assessee to respond to the notice before action is taken.
The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has directed the respondent department to de-seal the restaurant.
The petitioner/assessee has assailed a demand notice that was affixed to the premises of the petitioner. The half-yearly property tax in respect of the Pride Hotel was fixed by the Taxation Appeals Tribunal in a sum of Rs. 11,63,702 with effect from the second half of 2006–07. The order was carried out on appeal by the Greater Chennai Corporation before the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
The petitioner submitted that the demand notices are not in consonance with the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998. The notice, dated February 22, 2024, was not issued by the Commissioner. Section 116A stipulates a minimum period of 15 days for the petitioner to show cause. The restaurant operated by the petitioner has been placed under seal, and the petitioners are unable to operate the restaurant.
The department contended that the demand notices were issued by computing property tax dues in accordance with the order. The petitioners had 15 days' time to show cause against the notice dated February 22, 2024. The 15-day period would expire on March 8, 2024, and no action would be taken until then. With regard to the sealing of the restaurant, the license was not renewed.
“In light of the order dated November 8, 2023, in M.T.A. No. 19 of 2018, the recourse available to the petitioners would be to challenge such an order. The immediate concern is with regard to the restaurant. The renewal dated 30.03.2023 extends the licence up to 31.03.2024. Therefore, the licence to operate the restaurant is in force as of today,” the court said.
Counsel For Petitioner: P.Wilson
Counsel For Respondent: P. Prithvi Chopda
Case Title: M/s.Indralok Hotel Pvt. Ltd. versus The Greater Chennai Corporation
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 92
Case No.: W.P.No.4953 of 2024