The Bombay High Court has sought a response from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to a petition filed by J Kumar CRTG-JV challenging a property tax demand of Rs 23.71 crore linked to land used for Mumbai Metro infrastructure work.
A bench comprising Chief Justice M C Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna issued notices to the respondents on October 8, noting that the issues raised in the petition “require consideration”. The matter has been scheduled for its next hearing on October 15, 2026.
The joint venture has challenged a demand notice dated June 13, 2025, seeking Rs 23,71,93,493 in property tax for the period from April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2026. Its petition also contests a civic order issued on March 18, 2025, and an attachment warrant dated August 12, 2025.
JV Questions Legality of Recovery Action
J Kumar CRTG-JV has argued that the tax demands, attachment proceedings and related order are inconsistent with the provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and infringe its constitutional and fundamental rights. It has asked the court to set aside the disputed actions.
The case concerns land allocated for infrastructure work connected with Mumbai Metro projects. According to the petition, the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) received the land before allotting it to the joint venture for project execution.
The petitioner stated that the property was allotted to the MMRDA on May 25, 2016, and subsequently transferred to the joint venture on June 7, 2016. It has cited contractual records concerning three Metro project tenders and correspondence exchanged with the civic authorities over the tax assessment.
MMRDA Communication Cited
The joint venture has relied on an MMRDA communication issued in July 2017, which it says indicated that property tax should not apply to land parcels used for infrastructure projects.
It has also informed the court that it vacated the property on March 1, 2022, and notified the relevant authorities. Despite submitting objections and representations, the company claims that the BMC continued issuing demands and pursuing recovery.
The High Court is now considering the challenge, with the civic body’s response awaited. No final decision on the disputed tax liability has been reported.
Source: The Free Press Journal
