Requirement
- As you may recall, the demand The first For the tax year, it was about ILS 1,500,000. As a result of the change resulting from the second requirement, the amended requirement, for most of the area (29,233 square meters) Saved In fact, the principle of the agreement. The change applies to a relatively small area of 667 square meters, which is charged at the minimum rate (ILS 49.99 per square meter) according to the order as a "building". Had the Council not been "released" from the agreement regarding those 667 square meters, the Petitioner would have been supposed to pay ILS 312,600 for 2002; Following her partial discharge, she was required to pay ILS 332,950.
- Despite the ruling The Law in the Case Mevo'ot Hermon, which was not appealed by the parties, the IEC still claims today, as it claimed in the proceeding in the Mevo'ot Hermon, because the facilities, pillars, etc. on the site are not within the definition of a "structure"; As may be recalled, there are also alternative arguments: even if it is a "building", according to the IEC, the area of the building must be calculated according to the area occupied by each of the feet of the installation or column; Alternatively, it argues that there are various exemptions. It was agreed between the parties - and in my opinion there is no need to elaborate on this - that some of the issues will be discussed in the Appeals Committee and some in court.
The Release from the Agreement Regarding Arnona - The Case Law
- As stated, the question of exemption from an agreement regarding municipal taxes was discussed in this court in the matter of Aloni Complex. As determined in this case, the agreement between the parties regarding the payment of property taxes is not the end of the story and is subject to the authority's obligation to release the agreement if the public interest requires it; It is necessary to examine whether there are reasons justifying the release of the authority from the agreement. The need to collect real tax alone does not justify, in each and every case, a release from consent. We must find the Archimedean balance point that will express the opposing considerations - the consideration of respecting the agreement on the one hand, and the consideration of collecting a real tax on the other. This is not a rigid balance. The balance is influenced by the importance of the considerations and the intensity of the damage to them; After all, an agreement on an assessment that is contrary to the law is not the same as an assessment that constitutes a compromise between the parties; After all, an assessment caused by a factual or legal error in the classification of a structure as an agreement on an assessment is intended to save the costs involved in the factual and legal clarification of the parties' claims.
On the concrete matter that was on the agenda in the matter of Aloni Complex, and as explained there, the consent of the parties is intended to save litigation costs and is also intended to create an "average" between buildings that did not meet a certain definition and buildings that met the definition. There was no factual or legal error in that matter. It was held in the same case that the "release" did not properly balance the necessary considerations. The purpose of the agreement there was not to grant an exemption or discount from municipal taxes. Moreover, it is not clear that it is precisely the Respondent's assessment in that case (the Nesher Municipality) that is a "true assessment". The authority's desire to collect property taxes according to the higher classification does not amount to a legal justification that allows the weight of the agreement between the parties to be underestimated. Therefore, it was held, the respondent in that case was not entitled, in the circumstances of that matter, to be released from the agreement.