Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Idea Cellular Limited vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & 2 on 14 March, 2014

Author: Akil Kureshi

Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sonia Gokani

           C/SCA/114/2014                                ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 114 of 2014



================================================================
                IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED....Petitioner(s)
                             Versus
        AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & 2....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR JAL SOLI UNWALA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR JAIMIN GANDH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MS JIRGA D JHAVERI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2 - 3
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
                 and
                 HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

                            Date : 14/03/2014


                             ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Petitioner has challenged the notice/warrant dated 23.12.2013 as at Annexure A to the petition issued by respondent No.1 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. Through such notice, the said respondent seeks to recover municipal tax from the petitioner to the tune of Rs.7,36,326/-. Such tax pertains to the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14. It is undisputed that the question of taxability of the underground cables laid down by the petitioner and other telephone companies came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Adani Gas Limited and Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/114/2014 ORDER others and by judgment dated 24.10.2013, the Court upheld the authority of the Municipalities to tax such activities. The Court, however, did not permit the Municipalities to recover taxes retrospectively and quashed the bills for the past periods. It is pointed out that some of the petitioners including the present petitioner has approached the Supreme Court against such judgment of the High Court. Admittedly, so far no stay has been granted. In the meantime, the Municipality has initiated recovery proceedings after issuing bills. At the stage of notice, we had protected the petitioner against coercive recovery on payment of 50% of the bill amount.

The sole question raised by the counsel for the petitioner was that in the present case, the procedure laid down in rules 15 and 20 of the Taxation Rules contained the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act has not been followed. Counsel for the petitioner contended that special notice envisaged under rule 15(2) and the procedure envisaged under rule 20 of the said Rules has not been followed. The respondents, however, pointed out that such notices were issued. The petitioner had replied and objected and after considering such objections, the Appellate Officer of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation had passed order on 10.2.2012 providing that the width of cable may be considered as 80 mm and tax may be calculated accordingly. Undisputedly, against the disputed bills, statutory appeal before the Small Causes Court would be available in terms of section 406 of the Act. In that view of the matter, we would not like to entertain this petition.

Only on this ground, therefore, this petition is not entertained leaving all contentions of the petitioner open to be raised before the appropriate forum. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Interim relief is vacated.

(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) (vjn) Page 3 of 3