Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Hari A V vs The Chief Commissioner on 1 April, 2024

Author: B M Shyam Prasad

Bench: B M Shyam Prasad

                                                  -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:13155
                                                             WP No. 4127 of 2024




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                             DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2024
                                            BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 4127 OF 2024 (LB-BMP)

                      BETWEEN:

                            SRI HARI A V
                            S/O LATE VENKATESH A L
                            AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
                            RESIDING AT NO.342,
                            1ST CROSS, C.T. BED,
                            B.S.K. II STAGE,
                            BANGALORE - 70.
                                                             ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. VENKATA REDDY C M.,ADVOCATE)
                      AND:

                      1.    THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
                            BRUHATH BANGALORE
                            MAHANAGARA PALIKE
Digitally signed by
NARASIMHA                   N.R.SQUARE,
MURTHY VANAMALA
Location: HIGH              BANGALORE - 560 009.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

                      2.    THE JOINT COMMISSIONER,
                            BOMMANAHALLI, SUB-DIVISION,
                            BBMP, BANGALORE - 560061.

                      3.    THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER,
                            BOMMANAHALLI, SUB-DIVISION,
                            BBMP, BANGALORE - 560061

                                                          ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI. KESHAV M DATAR.,ADVOCATE)
                                 -2-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:13155
                                            WP No. 4127 of 2024




      THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
THE    ORDER AND SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED
16.11.2023    BEARING     NO.    ARO(BMH)     /W-188/PR-
189/2016-17 ISSUED BY THE R-3 I.E AST REVENUE
OFFICER BOMMANAHALLI SUB DIVISION FOR THE AY
2016-17 VIDE ANX-B TO THE WP.

      THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

The petitioner, who asserts ownership of the property bearing No.441, PID No. 386/385/386/383/441 of Bilekahalli village, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru, has impugned the show causes notice issued under Section 144[15][c] of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020 [for short, the 'BBMP Act']. These show cause notices are for the assessment years 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019- 20 and 2020-21. The petitioner's primary grievance with these notices is because the property is not inspected as is required under Section 144[13] of the BBMP Act after due notice to the petitioner. -3-

NC: 2024:KHC:13155 WP No. 4127 of 2024 The show cause notices indicate that the petitioners had under-declared the total built up area as well as the area tenanted, and this Court has directed spot inspection calling upon the concerned from the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike [BBMP] to file a report of inspection. Presently, a Report is filed stating that the petitioner's property was inspected on 15.02.2024 and that there is difference in the details of the measurements as verified by the Revenue Inspector before issuance of the show cause notices and as verified in terms of this Court's order on inspection. These details read as under:

Sl. Description As per return As per the As per Court No. filed report of the Order Joint measurement Revenue inspection and Inspector mahazar report Demand Notice measurement Issued measurement
1. Built -up 0 sqft 7600sqft 13576sqft
2. Zonal 2008:D Non-Residential Both Classification 2016:B 2008:D 2016:B 2008:E 2016:C (SAS) Capped Capped Zone: C Capped Zone:D Zone: D 2008:D 2016:B Capped Zone:C I-RCC/Madras Terrace Building -4- NC: 2024:KHC:13155 WP No. 4127 of 2024 Year: 2016 Self:
                                                            6991           sft
                                                            Tenant:1150 sft.


  3.   Category        V-Non-           V-Non-              V-Non-residential
                       residential      residential         buildings not
                       buildings not    buildings not       equipped with
                       equipped with    equipped with       central AC
                       central AC       central AC          Year: 2016 Self:
                       Year: 2016       Year: 2016 Self:    6991 sft
                       Self: 3500 sft   3600 sft            Tenant: 5435 sft.
                       Tenant: 3500     Tenant: 4000 sft    Parking Self: 0 sft
                       sft              Parking Self: 0     Tenant: 0 sft
                       Parking Self:    sft
                       0 sft            Tenant: 0 sft
                       Tenant: 0 sft




In the light of the obvious difference in the details, the show cause notices cannot be sustained and therefore there must be interference quashing these notices but with liberty to the respondents to initiate fresh proceedings in terms of the Inspection Report filed before this Court observing that all contentions otherwise are left open. Hence, the following ORDER The petition is allowed, and the impugned Show Cause Notices are quashed with liberty to the respondents to initiate notice under Section -5- NC: 2024:KHC:13155 WP No. 4127 of 2024 144[15][c] in terms of the details as ascertained at the time of spot inspection on 15.02.2024.

Sd/-

JUDGE NV