IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO.51724/2019 (LB - RES) Between:
Vasavi Vidyanikethan Trust, No.3, Vanivilas Road, V.V.Puram, Bengaluru – 560 004. Represented by its President, B.S.Arun Kumar.
(By Sri.H.Kantha Raja, Advocate) And:
1. State of Karnataka, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Represented by its Secretary, M.S.Building, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Veedhi, Bangalore – 560 001.
2. Somanahalli Gram Panchayat, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk – 560 082. Represented by its Secretary.
(By Smt.Prathima Honnapura, AGA for R1; Sri.M.S.Devaraju, Advocate for R2) …Petitioner ... Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the demand notices dated 01.02.2019, 02.03.2019, 20.03.2019, 28.03.2019, 22.10.2019, 11.07.2019 thereby demanding the petitioner to pay taxes for the Assessment Years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 vide Annexures-E to H and J, M respectively and notice – 1/2019-20 dated 11.07.2019 vide Annexure – M issued by the R-2 thereby demanding the petitioner to pay taxes for the Assessment year 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is stated to be a Public Charitable Trust under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner is running an educational institution under the name VVN Edify School. Respondent No.2 had assessed the petitioner’s property to Tax for the year 2014-15 and 2015-16 and it is submitted that the petitioner has been paying taxes.
2. The petitioner submits that the demands have been raised for the year 2018-19 and 2019-2020 for property Tax and that the petitioner by way of representations at Annexure-K and Annexure-L had pointed out that the petitioner was liable to pay only the Municipality Cess and not liable in so far as tax sought to be recovered.
3. Respondent No.2, as per Annexure-M, had earlier considered the request of the petitioner and while observing that the property of the petitioner does not fall within the Municipal limits, has failed to consider the request of the petitioner. It is to be noted that respondent No.2 is required to consider the question of exemption from levy of tax under Rule 6 (c) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Grama Panchayat Taxes and Fees) Rules, 1994 whereby the buildings and lands used solely for the charitable and public religious purposes and not let out for rent, are eligible to be considered for exemption of property tax.
4. The petitioner submits that the Trust, under which the education institution is being managed, is a Charitable Trust and necessary permission has been obtained from the Income Tax Authorities. It is the factual question that requires to be adjudicated.
5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter and taking note of the objection raised, the petitioner apart from the representations already made to respondent No.2, to make formal application seeking for exemption under Rule 6 (c) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Grama Panchayat Taxes and Fees) Rules, 1994. If such application is made, respondent No.2 to consider the same in accordance with applicable law.
6. It is made clear that the consideration at an earlier point of time at Annexure-M does not address the issue as regards exemption for Charitable purpose as per Rule 6 (c) referred to above and hence, respondent No.2 is to consider the representations already made as well as the fresh application seeking exemption from paying property tax as referred to above. Till such determination, the demand made for payment of tax by the petitioner is to be kept in abeyance.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed off subject to the above observations.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-