- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.3758 OF 2014 (LB-TAX) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.19906 OF 2014 (LB-TAX) WRIT PETITION NO.50117 OF 2014 (LB-TAX) WRIT PETITION NO.23330 OF 2015 (LB-TAX) IN WP NO. 3758/2014 BETWEEN: OZONE PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 042 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR.SHREEHARI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.LATHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU - 560 002 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER HSR SUB DIVISION BEGUR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 068 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHE GOWDA, AGA FOR R.1; SRI.B.S.KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 AND R.3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, STRIKING DOWN SEC.108(A) OF THE ACT AS BEING AND ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC. IN WP NO.19906/2014 BETWEEN: MAGNA WARE HOUSING & DISTRIBUTION PVT LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTER OFFICE AT EPIP AREA, NEXT TO SATYA SAI HOSPITAL WHITE FIELD, BANGALORE - 560 066. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SURESH SINGARAVELU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.LATHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R.SQUARE BENGALURU - 560 002 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R.SQUARE BENGALURU - 560 002 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHE GOWDA, AGA FOR R.1; SRI.S.N.PRASHANTH CHANDRA, AVOCATE FOR R.2 AND R.3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN SEC.108(A) OF THE ACT AS BEING & ULTRA VIRES THE CONSTITUTION AND ETC. IN WP NO. 50117/2014 BETWEEN: OZONE PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 042 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR.M.SREEHARI AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. FARAH FATHIMA, ADVOCATE) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU -560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BENGALURU -560 002 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER HSR LAYOUT, BEGUR ROAD BOMMANAHALLI ZONE BBMP BENGALURU - 560 068 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER HSR LAYOUT, BEGUR ROAD BOMMANAHALLI ZONE BBMP BENGALURU - 560 068 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K.KENCHE GOWDA, AGA FOR R.1 SRI.B.S.KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 AND R.4 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DTD.20.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE R-4 (ANNEX-A) AND ETC. IN WP NO.23330/2015 BETWEEN: OZONE PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.38, ULSOOR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 042 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR M.SREEHARI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS AND ALSO OZONE TECH PARK GARVEBHAVI PALYA, HOSUR MAIN ROAD BENGAURU - 68 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. FARAHA FATHIMA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BENGALURU - 560 002 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER HSR LAYOUT BEGUR ROAD BOMMANAHALLI ZONE, BBMP BENGALURU - 560 068 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER HSR LAYOUT, BEGUR ROAD BOMMANAHALLI ZONE, BBMP BENGALURU - 560 068 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHE GOWDA, AGA FOR R.1; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS SRI.B.S.KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R.2 AND R.4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMANDS DATED 21.5.2015 ISSUED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER In this batch of petitions, a common issue arises for consideration and, therefore, all the petitions are heard and disposed of together. 2. In this batch of writ petitions, the petitioners -owners of the respective schedule properties are aggrieved by the demand notices issued by respondent No.3. The said demand notices have been issued in exercise of powers under Section 108A(3) and 108A(12) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short, the ‘KMC Act’). - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 3. The petitioners place reliance on the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M/s. MAC Charles (India) Ltd. v. The Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and Others in W.P.Nos.13385/2013 c/w 12397/2013. It is contended that the impugned demand notices issued in the present petitions are squarely covered by the aforementioned decision, wherein it was held particularly in paragraphs 13 and 14 that the Municipal Authority cannot seek to re-assess or revise the self-assessment returns filed by the property owners retrospectively, particularly from the year 2008-09 onwards. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petitions and relying on the judgment referred to above, contends that in the present batch of cases too, the demand notices were issued only in the year 2014, which is clearly in contravention of the mandate under Section 108A(14) of the KMC Act. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-BBMP submits that respondent No.3, being the Authorized Officer, has undertaken a random scrutiny and, upon being satisfied that the particulars furnished by the petitioners were inaccurate, has rightly exercised jurisdiction to raise the impugned demand. Hence, it is submitted that no interference is called for by this Court. 6. At this stage, it is relevant to extract Section 108A(14) of the KMC Act, which reads as under: "108A. Levy and calculation of property tax in respect of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike.- (14) An assessment or re-assessment under this section shall not be made after the following time limits,- (i) three years after filing the tax return under this section; (ii) three years after the evidence of facts, sufficient in the opinion of the Commissioner or the authorized officer to justify making of the re-assessment, comes to its knowledge, whichever is later. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 7. Admittedly, in the present batch of petitions, the impugned demand notices issued by respondent No.3 are final in nature and pertain to the year 2014. Section 108A(14) of the KMC Act stipulates a specific time limit within which the assessment or reassessment of property tax must be carried out namely, within three years from the date of filing of the return under Section 108A. In the present case, it is evident that the demand notices seek to retrospectively levy differential tax amounts from the year 2008 onwards, on the assumption that the self-assessment returns submitted by the petitioners were based on incorrect or incomplete material. 8. This Court is of the considered view that such retrospective initiation of proceedings for recovery, beyond the statutory limitation period of three years, is clearly impermissible under the express mandate of Section 108A(14). Although the Act does vest authority - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS in the Authorized Officer or the Commissioner to scrutinize and assess whether a self-assessment has been properly made, such powers must be exercised strictly within the statutory framework. The limitation prescribed under Section 108A(14) cannot be circumvented under the guise of scrutiny or reassessment. 9. Therefore, the impugned demand notices, which seek to reopen self-assessments and recover tax differentials for the years beyond the permissible period of limitation, are ex facie illegal and liable to be set aside. The respondent-authorities are duty-bound to adhere to the statutory safeguards and time limits laid down under the KMC Act, particularly Section 108A(14), while exercising their powers of reassessment and recovery. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 10. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) The writ petitions are allowed. (ii) The impugned Notification bearing No.Commr/BBMP-Deputy Commissioner (Res)/321-A/08-09 Bangalore dated 31.01.2009 passed by respondent No.2 and the scheme for assessment as per Annexure-A and the impugned Notification bearing No.O AA(CO)P.R 208:2012-13, Bangalore dated 21.12.2012 passed by respondent No.1 as per Annexure-B are hereby quashed and set-aside in W.P.Nos.3758/2014 and W.P.No.19906/2014. (iii) The impugned demand notice/final demand notices bearing Nos.BBMP/ARO/ HSR/PR/799/13-14 dated 25.11.2013, 06.01.2014 and 21.01.2014 issued by respondent No.3 and produced as Annexures- C to C.2 are hereby quashed and set-aside and respondents - Authority are hereby directed to refund excess amount in accordance with law - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS within a period of three months from the date of receipt of order copy in W.P.No.3758/2014. (iv) The impugned demand notice dated 27.07.2012 bearing No.DA/K.T.R. NO. 165/12-13 M.R No.12-13, issued by the respondent-authorities as per Annexure-C in W.P.No.19906/2014 are hereby quashed and set-aside. (v) The impugned demand notice bearing No. BBMP/SAKA/HSR/PR/169/14-15 dated 20.09.2014, issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-A, and the notice bearing No. 40708 dated 18.10.2014, issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-B, are hereby quashed and set-aside in W.P. No.50117/2014. (vi) The impugned demand notice bearing No. BBMP/ARO/HSR/PR/152/15-16 dated 21.05.2015, issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-A, the demand notice bearing No.BBMP/ARO/HSR/PR/132/13-14 dated 08.05.2015, issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-B and the reply dated - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23666 WP No. 3758 of 2014 C/W WP No. 19906 of 2014 AND 2 OTHERS 19.06.2015 in No.BBMP/Jt.Comr.(B.Z)/PR/ 106/15-16 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-B1 are hereby quashed and set aside in W.P. No.23330/2015. (vii) It is made clear that the respondents- authorities are at liberty to initiate appropriate action, if so warranted, strictly in accordance with law and within the time limits prescribed under Section 108A(14) of the KMC Act. (viii) All the matters are remitted back to respondent No.3 for conducting a fresh enquiry, if deemed necessary. However, it is made clear that any such enquiry shall be strictly in compliance with the time limitation prescribed under Section 108A(14)(i) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35