Common Law

1.  In Mumbai, the Year 2013 marks the dawn of property taxes being imposed, retrospectively from the year 01.04.2010, on the basis of Capital Value of the concerned property as against the earlier practice of taxation based on Rateable Value of the property. This change of regime resulted in significant increase in property tax liability of the property owners. The said change of regime was under challenge before Hon’ble Bombay High Court. 2.  The main objects of introducing / shifting to the capital value system was to remove the disparities in tax liabilities between old and new properties / buildings. 3.  However, it appears that after introduction of this new regime, the disparities in tax liabilities between old and new properties / buildings have increased multi fold, as the new properties (occupied and assessed post 2010) are being taxed without having any reference to old method of taxation, and the benefit of capping of tax provided u/s 140A are not being bestowed

The subject of taxation is a “Rocket Science”. The constitution of Nine Judges Bench in the Mafatlal Industries Case, Reported in (1997) 5 SCC 536, running into more than 500 pages; the extremely contested Vodafone litigation; and the present Judgment of Bombay High Court running into 310 Pages, at least furnishes some justification to this statement of Rocket Science. There are umpteen Judgments, some of which are relied herein also (Para 147), that whilst dealing with challenge to Taxation laws, greater latitude is shown by Constitutional Courts, only for the reason that Taxation / Economic Legislation, by their very nature, are very complex. And hold on, the Regime of Property Tax based on Capital Value of the Property, was brought in force, on the recommendations of Tata Institute of “Social Sciences”. (Para 33 of the Judgment) Did these Social Scientist, nevertheless very respectable, would appreciate an Inch of what was discussed in 310 Pages of Judgment, even assuming t