Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Retrospective Amendment of Municipal Assessment List Under Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. Omission of a Building from Annual Assessment List by Mistake Was Held Curable by Post-Settlement Amendment Under Sections 66 and 67, Allowing House Tax for the Entire Assessment Year 1959-60.

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from the levy of house tax on a building owned by Punjab National Bank Limited, situated at No. 5 Parliament Street, New Delhi. The building was completed and occupied on July 1, 1958, but it was not entered in the assessment list operative from April 1, 1958 to March 31, 1959. On September 4, 1959, the New Delhi Municipal Committee issued a notice under Section 67 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 proposing to amend the assessment list for 1959-60 by inserting the property, with tax effective from April 1, 1959. The bank objected, but the objection was overruled and the committee passed a resolution on December 21, 1959 confirming the assessment. A bill and notice of demand followed. The bank filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the committee from enforcing the demand, arguing that the committee had no jurisdiction to include the building in the assessment list after it had been finalised. The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the bank. The District Judge dismissed the committee's appeal, and a learned single judge of the High Court dismissed the second appeal. On further appeal, a Division Bench referred the matter to a larger Bench, which by majority set aside the single judge's order and dismissed the suit. The bank then appealed to the Supreme Court by certificate. The sole legal issue before the Supreme Court was whether the New Delhi Municipal Committee was entitled to include the building in the assessment list operative for April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960 by amending it on November 20, 1959, and impose house tax for the year 1959-60. The appellant bank contended that once the assessment list was finalised under Section 66, the committee had no jurisdiction to amend it after March 31, 1959, and that the expression 'at any time' in Section 67 should be narrowly construed. It relied on the English decision in Ex parte Norris, In re Salder. The respondent committee argued that Section 67 expressly permitted amendment at any time on the enumerated grounds, including omission of property, and that Section 66's phrase 'subject to such amendment as may thereafter be duly made' clearly contemplated post-settlement amendments. The Supreme Court examined the scheme of Chapter V of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, particularly Sections 61 to 68. It held that the assessment list for the year commencing April 1, 1959 had to be settled by March 31, 1959 at the latest, but it remained liable to amendment under Section 67 even after that date. Section 66 did not require the amendment to be made before March 31, 1959. The expression 'subject to such amendment as may thereafter be duly made' in Section 66 indicated that the list could be amended even after March 31, 1959, as Section 67 provided for amendment 'at any time'. The court reasoned that if the power to amend were restricted to before March 31, 1959, the expression 'at any time' would have no meaning. The meaning of 'at any time' depended on the context, and read with the word 'thereafter' in Section 66, it supported the conclusion that post-settlement amendment was permissible. The building was liable to be included in the assessment list finalised on March 31, 1959, but was omitted by mistake, so the list was properly amended under Section 67. When the list was amended, the tax assessed for the building was deemed to be the tax for the year commencing April 1, 1959 and ending March 31, 1960. The court referred to Central Bank of India Ltd. Amritsar v. The Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ex parte Norris, In re Salder, but found no basis for the appellant's narrow interpretation. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the majority decision of the Delhi High Court, holding that the New Delhi Municipal Committee was entitled to include the building in the assessment list and impose house tax for the year 1959-60.

Headnote

Issue of Consideration

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the majority decision of the Delhi High Court. The New Delhi Municipal Committee was entitled to include the building in the assessment list for 1959-60 by amending it on November 20, 1959, and impose house tax for the year April 1, 1959 to March 31, 1960.

Law Points