LexSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. versus KAUSHIKBHAI K. PATEL AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.
v.
KAUSJHKBHAI K. PATEL AND ANR.
MAY 9, 2000
[S.P. BHARUCHA AND SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, JJ.]
Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1958: Sections 3-A(5)(a) & (b) and
Form NT (as substituted in 1992).
A
B
Tax-Refund of-Owner of omnibus did not use the vehicle for more C
than three months-Provision required owner to prove that such non-user of
vehicle was due to reasons beyond his control in order to claim refund of
tax-Held: High Court rightly struck down the words 'for reasons beyond
the control of such owner or person" in S.3(A)(5)(b)-Hence, owner entitled
for refund of tax-Constitution of India, 1950, Arts. 14 and 19.
D
Section 3-Tax-nature of-Held: ls compensatory in nature.
Words and Phrases:
"Reasons beyond the control"-Meaning of-Jn the context of S.3-
E
A(5)(b) of the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1958.
The respondent was the owner of an omnibus. The said vehicle had been
used or kept for use for more than six months. The respondent had intimated
the non-user of the said omnibus to the Motor Vehicle Inspector by filing Form
NT and claimed refund of tax for the said period. The respondent's claim for F
refund was allowed only for three months and for the remaining period it was
not allowed on the grounds that the omnibus had been kept in non-use for a
period exceeding three months and that the respondent failed to satisfy that
such non-use was for reasons beyond his control Consequently, the appellant
issued a demand notice demanding payment of composite tax and penalty.
The respondent filed a Special Civil Application before the High Court
challenging the said demand notice. The High Court allowed the Application
and struck down the words "for reasons beyond the control of such owner or
person" occurring in Section 3-A(S)(b) of the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax
Act, 1958. Hence this appeal.
61
G
H
62
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. I S.C.R.
· A
On behal{of the appellant it was contended that the condition imposed
in Section :3-A(S)(b) was only to check evasion of tax and to see that the refund
was granted only in genuine cases; that ordinarily owner having purchased
the omnibus investing several lakhs of rupees could not keep the vehicle off
the road or put to non-use for a period more than three months and, therefore,
B requiring satisfaction of the State Government or authorised officer as to the
reasons beyond their control for non-use of a vehicle was sustainable and
justified.
Dismissing the appeal, tbis Court
C
HELD 1. It is well settled in law that the tax imposed on a vehicle under
the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1958 is compensatory in nature for the
purpose of raising revenue to meet the expenditure for making and
maintaining the roads and regulation of traffic. To put it differently, the taxes
are levied on the vehicle using the roads or in any way forming the part of the
Oow of traffic on roads which is required to be regulated and not on the vehicles
D which do not use the roads at all. What is material and relevant is use of road
by vehicles for levy of tax under the Act. The reasons for non-use of roads
are immaterial and irrele"'ant when the nature of the tax itself is
. compensatory for use of roads. It follows from Section 3(2) of the Act that
. where a motor v~hicle is not using the roads no tax is levied thereon. If any
E · tax has been paid in relation to such vehicle then the tax for the period during
which it was not put on the road is refundable. In order to avoid evasion of tax
the State Can compel the owner to pay tax in advance. In fact Sections 3-A.(S)(a)
and (b) speak ofrefund of tax that had been collected earlier. (66-G-H; 67-A)
2.1. Various provisions and safeguards are available in the Act. The
F authorities have enough powers to check evasion of tax even without insisting
for the ·reasons beyond the control of a registered owner or person as to the
reasons for non-use. A registered owner or the person in possession in
addition to filing of Form NT, can be directed to surrender the registration
certificate, fitness certificate etc. for the period of non-use. If the vehicles
G are clandestinely put to use without the certificate of registration, fitness
certificate or taxation certificate, it is open to the authorities to take action
against the owner in accordanice with law. (67-E-F)
2.2. Looking to the Statement of Objects and Reasons for the
amendment, it appears that the appellants doExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.