Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 1041 of 2008, Judgment Date: Dec 09, 2015

                                                              NON-REPORTABLE

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                        CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1041 OF 2008


INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD.                                .....APPELLANT(S)           

                                  VERSUS                                                                 

A.P. INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION                .....RESPONDENT(S)          
LTD. & ORS.                                                            

                                   W I T H

                      WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 499 OF 2007



                               J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as  the  'IOC')  has
challenged the common judgment rendered by the  High  Court  of  Judicature,
Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in the two writ petitions which  were  filed  by
the IOC impugning the order dated  14.12.2002  coupled  with  demand  notice
dated 10.07.2002 and order  dated  14.10.2002  coupled  with  demand  notice
dated 12.06.2003 respectively.  By the aforesaid  orders,  respondent  No.1,
which is Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation  Limited,  had
taken the stand that IOC is liable to pay the property tax on the  value  of
storage and water tanks of the IOC situated in  the  industrial  development
area of Cuddapah (A.P.) and in the demand notices, specific demand was  made
for payment of the property tax on the said  storage  tanks.   The  property
tax  was  demanded  under  The  Andhra  Pradesh  Panchayat  Raj  Act,   1994
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').  Thus, identical relief was  claimed
in the two writ petitions and the occasion for  filing  two  writ  petitions
was that the demand notices calling upon the IOC to  pay  the  property  tax
related to four different years.   Assessment  Years  2000-01,  2001-02  and
2002-03 were covered by  the  demand  notice  dated  10.07.2002  and  demand
notice dated 12.06.2003 pertained to Assessment Year 2002-03.  This was  the
reason for the High Court to dispose  of  the  two  writ  petitions  by  the
common decision.  The High Court  has,  by  reason  of  the  said  judgment,
dismissed the writ petitions  of  the  IOC  holding  that  property  tax  is
payable under the provisions of the aforesaid Act.

We may mention at the outset that though the impugned demand was  challenged
on number of grounds  which,  inter  alia,  included  the  ground  that  the
demands were violative of the principles  of  natural  justice  as  well  as
provisions of the Act itself, there was no challenge to  the  vires  of  any
provision of the Act.  The question that fell for consideration  before  the
High Court, thus, was as to whether the aforesaid storage  and  water  tanks
could be termed as 'building' within the meaning of Section 2(3) of the  Act
and be covered by the definition of 'house' contained in  Section  2(19)  of
the Act as the tax is payable on the 'house'.
      After the High Court had given its  judgment,  another  demand  notice
dated 03.07.2007 was issued,  creating  demands  of  property  tax  for  the
Assessment Years upto 2006-07 and challenging the said demand notice on  the
same grounds, IOC has also filed Writ Petition  (C)  No.  499/2007  in  this
Court directly under Article 32  of  the  Constitution.   This  is  how  the
appeal and writ petition touching upon the identical  issue,  as  enumerated
above, have been taken up for hearing.

Having regard to the  nature  of  issue  involved,  though  it  may  not  be
necessary to traverse through the  facts  in  detail,  those  minimal  facts
which are to be kept in mind while deciding  the  issue,  are  recapitulated
below:
            The IOC is a Central Government undertaking,  which  is  in  the
business  of  marketing  products  including  petrol,  high  speed   diesel,
liquified petroleum gas, lubricants  etc.   For  the  purpose  of  efficient
distribution of its products, the IOC has storage depots  and  LPG  bottling
plants at various places.  One  such  LPG  bottling  plant  of  the  IOC  is
situated in the industrial development area, Cuddapah.  This bottling  plant
is spread over a large extent of land  and  consists  of  various  building,
machinery and LPG storage tanks.  The entire bottling plant falls within  in
the jurisdiction of the Chinnachowk Grama Panchayat.

The Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1994  was  enacted  which  deals  with
various facets of Panchayati Raj.  It also provides for provisions for  levy
of property tax and machinery for collection thereof.  Under  the  aforesaid
provisions, the Chinnachowk Grama Panchayat  initially  fixed  the  property
tax for the Assessment Year 1998-99 at Rs.9,11,380.60.   This  property  tax
was collected on the basis of cost of machinery equipment,  which  according
to IOC do not form part of any 'building'.  The aforesaid  entire  area  was
handed over  to  the  first  respondent  which  was  also  vested  with  all
necessary powers conferred on the Gram Panchayat under the Act.   Respondent
No.1, thus, assumed jurisdiction over the area with  power  to  collect  the
property tax.  On the assumption of  such  powers,  respondent  No.1  issued
demand notice dated 10.01.1999 to the IOC  demanding  tax  to  the  tune  of
Rs.9,11,380.60 for the Assessment Year 1998-99.  However,  this  demand  was
revised on the representation by the IOC pointing out the mistake  committed
in the calculation of the property tax and was reduced to Rs.7,14,393.   The
IOC paid the aforesaid amount of tax.

In the year 2001, IOC approached respondent No.1 for  further  reduction  of
property tax on the ground that  LPG  storage  tanks  consisting  of  Horton
Sphere and 3 bullets cannot be taken into consideration for  calculation  of
the tax as these structures do not answer the description of 'building'  and
'house' as defined  under  the  Act.   Vide  order  dated  08.12.2001,  this
request of the IOC was rejected by  respondent  No.3.   Thereafter,  demands
were made for other Assessment Years  and  representations  of  IOC  against
those demands were  also  rejected.   This  is  how,  challenging  the  said
demands, the two writ petitions were filed by  the  IOC,  as  already  noted
earlier.

The case of the IOC was that the value of LPG storage  tanks  which  amounts
to Rs.557 lakhs and the value of the water storage tanks  which  amounts  to
Rs.35 lakhs, do not fall for levy of property tax.  The  LPG  storage  tanks
are the sphere and bullets which are  pressure  vessels  fabricated  out  of
special materials to store liquefied petroleum gas and  have  fittings  like
safety relieve valve, high level alarm, fixed tube gauge, liquid  inlet  and
outlet pipes, manhole cover, Servogauge,  differential  pressure  gauge  and
other fittings which are mandatory under the safety guidelines of the  Chief
Controller of Explosive and Oil Industry  safety  norms.   These  structures
are pressure vessels, in which no human being  can  enter  or  stay.   These
structures are also operated for long period of time.  It is  only  after  a
lapse of more than a few years, humans enter  the  structure  for  cleaning.
Similarly, the water storage tanks are normally filled with water or use  in
case of emergencies.  These tanks also cannot be inhabited  by  human  being
during their normal operation.  These tanks are also cleaned after  a  lapse
of few years only.

In the aforesaid backdrop, the question that arises for consideration is  as
to whether the storage tanks which store LPG can be  considered  as  'house'
within the meaning of the Act as the taxes  are  leviable,  inter  alia,  on
houses.  The material provisions which have to be taken  into  consideration
are the definition of the terms 'building' and 'house' which are defined  by
sub-section (3) of Section 2 of the Act and sub-section (19)  of  Section  2
of the Act.  These are as follows:
“Section 2(3) :  'building'  includes  a  house,  out-house,  shop,  stable,
latrine, shed (other than a cattle shed in an agricultural land), hut,  wall
and any other such structure whether of masonry, bricks,  wood,  mud,  metal
or other material whatsoever;

      Section 2(19) : 'House' means a  building  or  a  hut  fit  for  human
occupation, whether as a residence  or  otherwise  and  includes  any  shop,
factory, workshop or  warehouse  or  any  building  used  for  garraging  or
parking buses or as a bus-stand, cattle shed (other than a  cattle  shed  in
any agricultural land, poultry shed or dairy shed);”

            Before proceeding further, we  would  also  take  note  of  some
other provisions of the Act which were pointed out by  the  learned  counsel
for the parties.  These are:
      “Section 2(20)  :  'Hut'  means  any  building  which  is  constructed
principally of  wood,  mud,  leaves,  grass,  or  thatch  and  includes  any
temporary structure of whatever size  or  any  small  building  of  whatever
material made, which the gram panchayat may declare to  be  a  hut  for  the
purposes of this Act;

      Section 60 - Taxes leviable by gram panchayats

(1)   A gram panchayat shall levy in the village,


(a) a House-tax;


(b) kolagaram, or katarusum that is to say, tax on the village produce  sold
in the village by weight measurement or number subject to such rules as  may
be prescribed;


(c) such other tax as the Government may, by notification, direct  any  gram
panchayat or class of gram panchayats to levy subject to such rules  as  may
be prescribed;


Provided that no such notification shall be issued and no  such  rule  shall
be made except with the previous approval of  the  Legislative  Assembly  of
the State.


(2)   A duty shall also be levied on transfers of property situated  in  the
area under the jurisdiction of the gram panchayat  in  accordance  with  the
provisions of Section 69.


(3)   Subject to such rules as may be  prescribed  the  gram  panchayat  may
also levy in the village,-


(i) a vehicle tax;


(ii) a tax on agricultural land for a specific purpose;


(iii) a land-cess at the rate of two naya paise in the rupee on the annual
rental value of all occupied lands which are not occupied by or adjacent
and appurtenant to, buildings;


(iv) fees for use of porambokes or communal lands under the control of the
gram panchayat;


(v) fees for the occupation  of  building  including  chavadies  and  sarais
under the control of the gram panchayat.


(4)   Every gram panchayat may also levy a duty in the form of  a  surcharge
on the seigniorage fees collected by the Government on materials other  than
minerals and minor minerals quarried in the village:


Provided that the rate at which such duty shall be levied shall be fixed  by
the gram panchayat with the previous approval of the Government.


(5)    Every  gram  panchayat  may,  with  the  previous  approval  of   the
prescribed authority also  levy,  in  respect  of  lands  lying  within  its
jurisdiction, a duty in the form of a surcharge at such rate, not  exceeding
twenty-five naya paise in the rupee, as may be fixed by the gram panchayat-


(a) in the Andhra Area, on the land cess, leviable under Section 78  of  the
Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Boards Act, 1920 and on the  education
tax leviable under section 37 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982;


(b) in the Telangana area, on the local cess leviable under section  135  of
the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) District Boards Act,  1955  and  on  the
education tax leviable under section 37  of  the  Andhra  Pradesh  Education
Act, 1982.


(6)   Any resolution of a gram  panchayat  abolishing  an  existing  tax  or
reducing the rate at which a tax is levied shall not be carried into  effect
without the previous approval of the Commissioner.


      Section 61 - House-tax

(1)   The house-tax referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of  section
60 shall, subject to such rules as may  be  prescribed,  be  levied  on  all
houses in the village on any one of the following basis, namely:


(a) annual rental value, or


(b) capital value, or


(c) such other basis as may be prescribed:


Provided that no house tax shall be levied  on  poultry  sheds  and  annexes
thereto which are essential for running the poultry farms.


(2)   The house-tax  shall,  subject  to  the  prior  payment  of  the  land
revenue, if any due to the Government in respect of the site  of  the  house
be a first charge upon the house and upon  the  movable  property,  if  any,
found within or upon the same and belonging to  the  person  liable  to  pay
such tax.


(3)   The house-tax shall be levied every year and shall, save as  otherwise
expressly provided in the rules made under sub-section (1) be  paid  by  the
owner within thirty days of the  commencement  of  the  year.  It  shall  be
levied at such rates as may be fixed by the gram panchayat, not  being  less
than the minimum rates and not exceeding the maximum  rates,  prescribed  in
regard to the basis of levy adopted by the gram panchayat.


(4)   The Government may make rules providing for--


(i) the exemption of special classes of houses from the tax;


(ii) the manner of ascertaining the annual or capital  value  of  houses  or
the categories into which they fall for the purposes of taxation;


(iii) the persons who shall be liable to pay the tax and the giving of
notice of transfer of houses;


(iv) the grant of exemptions from the tax on the ground of poverty;


(v) the grant of vacancy and other remissions; and


(vi) the circumstances in which, and the conditions subject to which  houses
constructed, reconstructed or demolished, or situated in areas included  in,
or excluded from the village, during any year, shall be liable or  cease  to
be liable to the whole or any portion of the tax.


(5)   If the occupier of a house pays the house-tax on behalf of  the  owner
thereof, such occupier shall be entitled to recover the same from the  owner
and may deduct the same from the rent then or thereafter due by him  to  the
owner.


      Section 62 - Levy of House-tax on a direction by Government


(1)   The Government may, by order published in the Andhra Pradesh  Gazette,
for special reasons to be specified in such order direct any gram  panchayat
to levy the house-tax referred to  in  clause  (a)  of  sub-section  (1)  of
section 60 at such rates and with effect from such date  not  being  earlier
than the first day of the year  immediately  following  that  in  which  the
order is published, as may be specified in the order.


      Such direction may be issued in respect of all  buildings  in  a  gram
panchayat  or  in  respect  of  only  such  buildings   belonging   to   the
undertakings  owned  or  controlled  by  the  State  Government  or  Central
Government and the buildings belonging to the State  Government  as  may  be
specified therein.


(2)    When  an  order  under  sub-section  (1)  has  been  published,   the
provisions of this Act relating to house-tax shall  apply  as  if  the  gram
panchayat had, on the date of  publication  of  such  order,  by  resolution
determined to levy the tax at  the  rate  and  with  effect  from  the  date
specified in the order, and as if no other resolution of the gram  panchayat
under Section 60 determining the rate at which and the date from  which  the
house-tax shall be levied, had taken effect.


(3)   A gram panchayat shall not alter the rate at which  the  house-tax  is
levied in pursuance of an order under sub-section (1) or  abolish  such  tax
except with the previous sanction of the Government.”


From the aforesaid definition of 'building' contained  in  Section  2(3)  of
the Act, it becomes apparent that very expansive meaning is assigned to  the
expression 'building' which inter alia includes a 'house'.  Apart from  some
specific nature of structures, namely,  out-house,  shop,  stable,  latrine,
shed etc., other 'such structures' are also covered by the  definition.   Of
course, in this process, other structures are qualified by the  word  'such'
which means that they have to be read ejusdem generis with the earlier  part
of the definition that mentions specific kind of structures.  The  case  set
up by the IOC, is that though the term 'building' is very broad and  'house'
is only one of the structure qualifies as building, the text in question  is
to be on 'house' and not on all other kinds of buildings.  In this  process,
it was argued that the structures in question,  namely,  LPG  storage  tanks
may be 'building' but they are not 'house',  as  every  building  is  not  a
house.  It was argued that the term 'house' is to take its flavour from  the
purpose for which 'house' is used, namely, the one which is  fit  for  human
occupation as the definition of 'house' itself  specifically  provides.   It
was argued that storage tanks were not at all fit for human  occupation  and
they could not even visited by the humans.   It  was  submitted  that  these
structures are pressure vessels in which no human being can enter  or  stay.
It is only after a lapse of more than a few years that  human  beings  enter
these structures that too for the  purpose  of  cleaning  only.   Similarly,
water storage tanks are normally filled with water in  case  of  emergencies
and these tanks also cannot be inhabited by the human  beings  during  their
normal operation.  These tanks can be cleaned after a  lapse  of  few  years
only.

It is difficult to countenance the  aforesaid  submissions  of  the  learned
senior counsel for the appellant.  As was  rightly  argued  by  the  learned
counsel for the respondents, the definition of  'house'  is  in  two  parts.
First part of this definition refers to building or  a  hut  fit  for  human
occupation, whether as a residence or otherwise.   In  this  context,  house
means a building or a hut. Therefore, in  the  first  instance,  it  has  to
qualify as a building or  as  a  hut.   However,  the  second  part  of  the
definition is inclusive in nature as it starts with the word 'includes'  and
mentions so many other types of buildings  and  makes  all  those  kinds  of
buildings qualify as house even when used for garaging or parking  buses  or
as a bus stand or cattle shed.

It cannot be disputed that structures in question are  building.   The  term
'building' as defined in Black's Law Dictionary, 10th Edition  mentioned  it
to be a structure with walls and a roof, esp. a permanent  structure.   Even
Mr. Guru Krishnakumar, learned senior counsel for the IOC accepted that  the
storage tanks and water tanks would  qualify  as  buildings.   'Storage'  is
described in the Black's Law Dictionary as 'the  act  of  putting  something
away for future use; esp., the keeping or placing of articles in a place  of
safekeeping, such as a warehouse  or  depository.   Black's  Law  Dictionary
also gives the description of warehouse as 'a building used to  store  goods
and other items'.  Oxford Dictionary also explains warehouse as  combination
of ware plus house and assigns the meaning as under:
“A building or part of a building used for the storage of  merchandise;  the
building in which a wholesale dealer keeps his stock of goods  for  sale;  a
building in which furniture or other property may be  stored;  a  government
building where goods are kept in bond.”

More significant is the manner in which  P.  Ramnath  Aiyar's  Advanced  Law
Lexicon, 4th Edition gives the description of storage and warehouse.  It  is
as follows:
“Storage and warehousing.  “Storage and Warehousing”  includes  storage  and
warehousing services for goods including liquids  and  gases  but  does  not
include any service provided for storage  of  agricultural  produce  or  any
service  provided  by  a  cold  storage.  [Finance  Act  (32  of  1994),  S.
65(1)(87)].”


The above definition makes it clear that  the  goods  which  are  meant  for
storage and warehousing services include liquid  and  gases  as  well.    In
Bijaya Kumar Agarwal v. State of Orissa[1], this Court  made  the  following
observations which are apt in the context:
“The  dictionary  meanings  suggest  that  ‘storing’  has  an   element   of
continuity as the purpose is to keep the commodity in store and retrieve  it
at some future date, even within a few days. If goods are  kept  or  stocked
in a warehouse, it can be immediately described as an act  of  ‘storage’.  A
vehicle can also be used as a  storehouse.  But,  whether  in  a  particular
case, a vehicle was used as a ‘store’ or whether a  person  had  stored  his
merchandise in a vehicle would be a matter of fact in  each  case.  Carrying
goods in a vehicle cannot per se be  ‘storing’  although  it  may  be  quite
possible that a vehicle is used as a store.  Transporting  is  not  storing.
Section 3(2)(d) of the Act  extracted  earlier  in  the  judgment  uses  the
expressions ‘storage’ and ‘transport’ as two separate acts  which  could  be
regulated by licences,  permits  or  otherwise.  The  Order  could  as  well
prohibit transporting of large  quantities  of  rice  or  paddy  within  the
sanction of Section 3 of the Act. Was it the intention  of  the  framers  of
the Order to prohibit ‘transport’ per se? Unless the facts in  a  particular
case reveal that the vehicle was used not merely for transporting the  goods
but also for ‘storing’ as understood in the  English  language  or  even  in
common parlance, it is difficult to hold in the affirmative.”


When we read the definition of 'house' in the context of meaning that is  to
be assigned to 'warehouse', it is clear that a place where goods are  stored
would be 'warehouse' which is specifically mentioned in  the  definition  of
house contained in Section 2(19) of the Act.  It would,  thus,  follow  that
it may not be necessary that such a place is capable of frequent  visits  by
the human beings or fit for human occupations.  The High Court  has  rightly
pointed out that as per the said definition, the requirement  that  a  house
should be fit for human occupations is only for huts which is defined  under
Section 20 of the Act.

The Legislature has provided a particular definition to 'house'  and  levied
property tax thereupon.  It is this fictional definition  of  'house'  which
is to be kept in mind for the purpose of levy of tax.

We, thus, do not find any merit in this appeal  as  well  as  writ  petition
which are accordingly dismissed with cost.



                             .............................................J.
                                                                (A.K. SIKRI)



                             .............................................J.
                                                     (ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)

NEW DELHI;
DECEMBER 09, 2015.
-----------------------
[1]   (1996) 5 SCC 1