The Kerala High Court in the case P. H. Fathima v State Of Kerala observed and has stated that as per Section 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act 1975, the District Collector may exercise revisional power against an assessment order.
The court in the case made it clear that the revisional power of the District Collector was not just limited to an order passed in appeal by the Revenue Divisional Officer.
In the present case, the petitioner was aggrieved by the rejection of the assessment order by the District Collector in revision, thus, the petitioner approached the High Court
The bench headed by Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh in the case observed and has quashed the order of the District Collector observed and has stated that from the bare perusal of Section 13, it can be gathered that the District Collector may exercise the revisional power against the assessment order, and it is not limited only to the order passed in appeal under Section 11 by the Revenue Divisional Officer and of course the power of revision against the assessment order or the appellate order is to be exercised within the parameters as provided under Section 13.
It has been stated under section 13 of the Act which pertains to the revisional power of the District Collector, wherein it is provided that the District Collector can exercise revisional power against any order passed by the appellate authority or the assessing authority.
The petitioner in the case preferred the revision against the assessment order before the District Collector. The petitioner revision plea was rejected by stating that the appeal shall lie against the assessment order before the Revenue Divisional Officer only. Therefore, the order stated that the revision against the assessment order shall lie before the District Collector against the appellate order only.
The High Court in the case observed and took note of the decision in the case James Varghese v District Collector and section 13 of the Act to state that revision against assessment order was maintainable before the District Collector.
The court while considering the said judgement and the provisions of Section 13 of the Kerala Building Tax Act observed and has quashed the impugned order, thus, the court remanded the matter back to the District Collector for a decision on merit in the revision filed by the petitioners against the assessment order.
Accordingly, the court allowed the writ plea.
The counsel, Advocates Aakhil Mohammed P.M and P. M. Mohammed Shiraz appeared for the petitioner.
Counsel for the respondents: None.
