Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE SUB-COLLECTOR, NARSAPUR AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 27/07/1999
BENCH:
D.P.Wadhwa, M.B.Shah
JUDGMENT:
D.P. Wadhwa, J.
Food Corporation of India (’Corporation’ for short) is
aggrieved by judgment dated October 31, 1989 of the Andhra
Pradesh High Court holding that Corporation is liable to
non-agricultural land tax amounting to Rs.20,994.80 for the
fasli years 1384 to 1397. The tax is levied under the
Andhra Pradesh Non- Agricultural Lands Assessment Act, 1963
(for short the ’Act’). Before the High Court Corporation
had challenged the order of the appellate authority under
the Act confirming the demand issued for collection of
non-agricultural land tax for 14 years. The demand was
raised by Palakole Mandal, West Godavari District, Andhra
Pradesh.
Two contentions have been raised before us: (1)
Corporation is exempt from taxation under Article 285 of the
Constitution and (2) assessment has to be made for each year
and respondent No. 2 Palakole Mandal could not make
assessment for 14 years on one go.
Corporation is constituted by the Food Corporation
Act, 1964. In our Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 7054 of
1995 (Food Corporation of India vs. Municipal Committee,
Jalabad and another), we have held that Corporation cannot
claim exemption from taxation under Article 285 of the
Constitution.
Under Section 3 of the Act for levy assessment on
agricultural land has to be for each fasli year. If we look
at the order impugned before the High Court confirming the
demand for 14 years it is not that assessment was not made
for each fasli year separately. It is only the demand which
has been raised for 14 years. High Court has held that what
Section 3 of the Act enjoins is that a tax shall be levied
and collected at the rate specified for each fasli year and
there is nothing to warrant the contention that the demand
cannot be made after the expiry of the fasli year to which
it relates. High Court also held that no attempt had been
made to say that the claim for tax for any particular year
had become barred by time. We do not find error in the
reasonings of the High Court.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2