Calcutta High Court
Larsen & Toubro Limited & Anr vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation And ... on 20 June, 2016
Author: I. P. Mukerji
Bench: I. P. Mukerji
ORDER SHEET
WP 439 OF 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED & ANR.
Versus
THE KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.
.........
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE I. P. MUKERJI Date : 20th June, 2016.
Mr. P.K. Ghosh, senior advocate, Mr. S.Dutta, Mr. R.K. Basu ...appear.
Mr.B.Mukherjee, Mr. D. Mondal ...appear.
The Court : A substantial question of law has been raised in this writ application.
It relates to the Letter of Intimation dated 3rd December, 2015 issued by Kolkata Municipal Corporation to the writ petitioner company. This notice has been issued pursuant to the impugned order dated 30th March, 2015 by the Commissioner of the Corporation in exercise of powers under Section 192 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.
The valuation of the writ petitioner company's premises has been revised from 1st quarter, 2001. The revised valuation has been made on the basis of the rent received by the writ petitioner, according to the Commissioner.
Mr. Ghosh, learned senior advocate for the petitioners submitted that the above section had no retrospective operation.
The Commissioner could not have opened the past valuation from 1st quarter, 2001.
At any rate, the past valuation had been made, considering all the materials available, including rent received by the writ petitioner company. Hence, it had attained finality. On the self-same facts, the valuation and assessment could not have been reopened.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate for the Corporation submits that Section 192 invests the Commissioner with unlimited powers to reopen any past valuation 2 or assessment. In this case, it was found that the assessment was made on a misconception of the rent received by the petitioner company. The impugned assessment and the Letter of Intimation were justified. The interim order should not be continued as that would involve a loss of revenue to the Corporation.
The facts show that substantial questions of facts and law have to be gone into in this writ application.
It is also on record that Rs.41,03,252/- is deposited by the writ petitioner and kept in the suspense account of the Corporation. The total amount claimed from the writ petitioner by the Corporation appears to be Rs.2,28,83,414/- after taking into account 90% penalty waiver but including interest.
In my opinion, it would be just and proper if the writ is heard out on filing of affidavits. The interim order will continue till the disposal of the application, subject to the writ petitioner company depositing a further sum of Rs.50 lacs in the suspense account of the Corporation by 15th July, 2016. The interim order will continue unconditionally till 15th July, 2016. Instead of the fund depreciating in value in the suspense account, it would be better if the sum is invested in a term deposit account earning the highest rate of interest on a short term deposit with a nationalised bank. The entire fund [inclusive of Rs.41,03,252/-, if not adjusted earlier] should be deposited in the name of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.
This writ application is formally admitted.
Let affidavit in opposition be filed by 8th July, 2016. List this application on 19th July, 2016. Affidavit in reply, if any, may be filed in the meantime.
All points are kept open.
Certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(I. P. MUKERJI, J.)
Pkd.
A.R.[C.R.]
3