Thousands of Bengaluru residents are reeling after receiving unexpected property tax notices from the city’s civic body. In what is being called a major software blunder, the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara
Palike (BBMP) has issued over 31,000 notices to flat owners across the city, citing underpayment of property tax due to the inclusion of car parking areas in the calculation of taxable carpet area.
The controversy stems from a flaw in the BBMP’s e-khata software, which reportedly misinterpreted the built-up area, wrongly factoring in parking slots as part of the “carpet area”, thereby inflating the tax liability for many homeowners.
Flat owners, many of whom had considered the e-khata process a step toward transparency, now find themselves facing tax demands ranging from a few thousand to several lakhs of rupees. In several cases, residents allege that these notices have been issued without any verification of original property documents.
A flat owner from South Bengaluru told The Times of India that BBMP has demanded tax on a parking space nearly the size of his actual flat. “They didn’t even verify the documents. The notice just arrived out of nowhere,” he said.
In Yelahanka, Vijay Kumar claimed the issue goes deeper. “When I registered my 1,700 sq ft flat under e-khata, BBMP staff told me to declare only 1,500 sq ft and hinted at a bribe of Rs 500. Now I’ve been slapped with a notice. How is this fair?” he asked.
Another resident, Rekha Bhatt from Mysore Road, received a notice accusing her of tax evasion, stating that her reassessed tax exceeds the previous amount by over 5%, breaching the acceptable threshold. She said that she is being penalised for simply following the BBMP’s own online process.
The backlash has triggered widespread resentment from many property owners who argued that the fault lies not with them but with the BBMP’s flawed systems and opaque procedures. Legal experts and resident welfare associations are now weighing their options.
Responding to the outrage, BBMP Special Commissioner (Revenue) Munish Moudgil acknowledged the confusion and said, “This is not about penalising anyone unfairly.” He said that earlier, taxes were being paid based on carpet area as recorded in the EPID system but, when applying for e-khata, applicants included parking areas, which are legally taxable. “We’re only recovering what is legally due,” he added.
Flat owners, however, are demanding a rollback of the notices and an overhaul of the e-khata assessment procedure. Many have begun organising petitions and legal consultations, accusing the civic body of arbitrary governance and a lack of accountability.
