Case Law Details
It cannot be said that section 141B(4) of the GPMC Act which permits / authorizes the Corporation to increase or decrease the property Tax as per the Taxation Rules cannot be said to be ultra vires to Article 243X of the Constitution of India. As observed hereinabove, section 141B(4) of the GPMC Act is part of the Statute which permits and/or authorizes the Corporation to increase or decrease the property Tax as per the Rules. Section 454 of the GPMC Act permits and/or authorizes to frame the Rules and in exercise of powers under Section 454 of the GPMC Act, Taxation Rules are framed.
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH)
[1.0] By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner as such challenges the levy of General Property Tax on IBS / Booster installed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also by way of amendment prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order to declare Section 141B of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as “GPMC Act”) as ultra vires to Article 243X of the Constitution of India. By way of amendment the petitioner has also prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order to strike down Rule 8B of the Taxation Rules (Amendment), 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “Taxation Rules”) under Chapter VIII of Schedule A to the GPMC Act as arbitrary to the extent the same provide for computation of levy of Tax on Mobile / Microwave Towers.
[2.0] At the outset it is required to be noted that as such the levy of Tax on Mobile Towers by the respondent No.2 Corporation has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in recent decision dated 07.03.2017 in the case of ATC Telecom Tower Corporation Private Limited & Anr. vs. State of Gujarat and Others rendered in Special Civil Application Nos.2693/2017 and other allied matters and by detailed judgment and order and for the reasons stated in the said judgment and order, the Division Bench has negatived the similar challenge to levy of property Tax on Mobile Towers. The aforesaid is not disputed by Shri Joshi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
