Mutation is meant for identifying person primarily liable for payment of tax

Dipali Naskar Vs Commissioner Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors (Calcutta High Court)

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30^th October, 2009 passed by the Deputy Assessor Collector-V, Tollygunge Tax Department, Kolkata Municipal Corporation whereby the said respondent cancelled the mutation of the premises no. 69A, Banerjee Para Lane. The said cancellation was done allegedly relying upon the judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court, Alipore in Title Appeal No. 188 of 1995 pending between the parties.

Learned advocate for the petitioner contends that the impugned order is a non-speaking one. The learned Additional District Judge did not pass any order for cancellation of the mutation. The respondent authority mis-read and mis-interpreted the order of the learned Court and cancelled the mutation.

Learned advocate representing the Kolkata Municipal Corporation places the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 5^th Court, Alipore. It has been submitted that the respondent authority was ad idem with the view expressed by the learned Additional District Judge, and accordingly thought it fit to cancel the mutation of the subject premises.

It has however been submitted that mutation will neither create nor extinguish title of either of the parties and the rights of the parties will be decided by the learned Court taking up the matter.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.