Kerala HC Orders Refund of Property Tax Deposit after adjusting dues

Synthetie Industries Ltd Vs State of Kerala (Kerala High Court)

Kerala High Court ruled on a writ petition filed by Synthetie Industries Ltd, seeking reassessment of property tax and a refund of excess payments. The petitioner requested directions to update the SANCHAYA software for reassessment in line with government orders (Exts. P6 and P10). Additionally, the petitioner sought the refund of the deposited amount after adjusting the property tax for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 and renewal of its license under the Panchayat Raj Act for 2016-17 after such adjustments.

The court observed that despite serving notice on the 2nd respondent on February 22, 2016, no counter affidavit was filed. The petition had been pending since February 2016, and interim orders had already been passed. Given the absence of a response from the respondents, the court noted that government orders (Exts. P6 and P10) remained valid and binding. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the requested reliefs.

The High Court directed the 2nd respondent to take necessary steps to refund the deposited amount after deducting the applicable property tax dues. The authorities were instructed to calculate and disburse the amount within two months of receiving the judgment. The ruling emphasized that government agencies must adhere to their directives and ensure timely tax reassessments.

Judicial precedents have established that local bodies must process tax-related matters in accordance with government directives. The absence of counterarguments in the present case further reinforced the petitioner’s right to a refund. This judgment highlights the court’s role in ensuring compliance with financial regulations and protecting taxpayer rights.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(i) direct the respondents to update the SANCHAYA software & complete the re-assessment of the property tax in light of P6 by issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

(ii) direct the 2nd Respondent to refund the amount deposited with the 2nd respondent after setting-off the property tax for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 by issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

(iii) direct the 2nd respondent to renew the license as required under the provisions of Panchayat Raj Act for the year 2016-17 after setting off the property tax for the assessment years 2013-2016 from the amount in deposit with the 2^{nd respondent.}

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 1^{st respondent.}

3. In spite of service of notice by special messenger on the 2^nd respondent on 22/2/2016, there is no appearance for the 2^nd This writ petition has been pending since February, 2016 and interim orders had been passed in the same. However, there is no counter affidavit placed on record. The 1^st respondent also has not placed any counter affidavit on record in the writ petition till date. I notice that Exts P6 and P10 orders of the Government, therefore hold the field and that the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs as sought for in the writ petition.

This writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to take appropriate steps to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner at the time of preferring Ext.P3 appeal after deducting the amounts due for the respective period as provided in Exts.P6 and P10 Government orders. The amounts shall be calculated and disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.