In UP schools exempted from house tax but not from water tax & sewerage tax – HC

In UP schools are exempted from house tax but not from water tax & sewerage tax – Allahabad High Court

In a recent judgment, Allahabad High Court has held that In Uttar Pradesh schools are exempted from house tax but no such exemption is available for levy of water tax and sewerage tax.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4370 (2025) (01) abcaus.in HC

In the instant case, a writ petition had been filed by the Petitioner school. The Petitioner was aggrieved of the impugned assessment and demand of house-tax and water-tax for the financial year 2023-24 issued by the Tax Superintendent, Nagar Nigam.

By the demand impugned, the petitioners were, inter alia, required to pay the outstanding building tax and interest thereon, besides the water-tax and sewerage-tax.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that after filing of the writ petition, the Nagar Nigam had issued an amended bill, whereby the demand pertaining to the building-tax had been done away with on account of the exemption available to the schools, however, the demand pertaining to the water-tax and sewerage-tax had been maintained.

The petitioners submitted that once the building-tax had been exempted, the Nagar Nigam was not justified in demanding water-tax and sewerage-tax.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that while the building-tax is levied under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, which provides for exemption under Section 177(c) of the Act of 1959 for schools however, the levy of water tax and sewerage tax is under the U.P. Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1975, wherein no such exemption is apparently available. Further the levy of the tax, as provided under Section 52 of the Act of 1975, is not dependent on levy of building-tax.

Therefore, the Hon’ble High Court held that the challenge sought to be laid to the levy of water-tax and sewerage-tax cannot be countenanced. To the said extent, the petition had no substance.

Accordingly, the Petition was dismissed.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST
• CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.
• Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC
• CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price
• Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities