Kerala High Court
M/S.Kottackal Agro Foods vs The Joint Regional Transport Officer on 26 January, 2014
Author: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/29TH ASWINA, 1936
WP(C).No. 26478 of 2014 (H)
------------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
------------------------
M/S.KOTTACKAL AGRO FOODS,
VII 124 E, KOMARA, MOOKKANNOOR P.O.,
ANGAMALY REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
PRABHATH M.S.,
BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
RESPONDENT(S) :
---------------------------
1. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, ANGAMALY,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-683 572.
2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR, TRANS TOWERS,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHOBA ANNAMA EAPEN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21-10-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 26478 of 2014 (H)
-----------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE INVOICE DATED 26-01-2014 ISSUED FROM
THE NEW CUSTOMS HOUSE, MUMBAI.
EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 01-10-2013 ISSUED BY
2ND RESPONDENT APPROVING REGISTRATION OF VEHICLES
MANUFACTURED BY M/S.DR.ING.H.C.F.PORSCHE.
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30-06-2014 ISSUED BY
THE MOTOR VEHICLE DEPARTMENT EVIDENCING RECEIPT OF A SUM
OF RS.11,95,085/-FROM THE MANAGING PARTNER OF
THE PETITIONER COMPANY TOWARDS ONE TIME MOTOR VEHICLE
TAX.
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 08-07-2014 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DEMANDING AND AMOUNT OF RS.11,24,408/-
TOWARDS MOTOR VEHICLE TAX.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
-----------------------------------
W.P(C). No. 26478 of 2014
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
(i) Issue writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing Exhibit.P4 demand notice issued against the petitioner;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order restraining the 1st respondent from initiating any coercive action pursuant to Exhibit-P4 demand notice;
(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 1st respondent to refund a sum of Rs.1,40,551/- being the excess tax collected from the petitioner relating to vehicle mentioned in Exhibit.P1."
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the liability sought to be mulcted upon the petitioner towards the 'One Time Tax' payable under the relevant provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, with respect to the purchase of a 'Porsche Cayenne Diesel Car' by the petitioner having a purchase value of `70,27,556/-, is not correct or sustainable, as they have sought to realise the tax at the rate of 33% of the WP(c). No.26478 of 2014 2 purchase value. As a matter of fact, such a proposal was incorporated in the 'Bill' when the same was introduced. But when the statute took its breath, by way of the amendment in the year 2014, the tax stipulated was only at the rate of 15% as per Item No.12 of Annexure 1 of the Taxation Act. It is also pointed out that, the purchase value was being calculated, also reckoning the element of tax under the KVAT Act, which is not correct or sustainable by virtue of the law declared by a Division Bench of this Court reported in Fathima Shirin V. Joint RTO, Kayamkulam and others (2013 (3) KHC 714).
3. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits on instructions that, an inadvertent mistake has crept in and accordingly Ext.P4 demand notice has been withdrawn. It is stated that the 'Certificate of Registration' in respect of the vehicle has already been forwarded to the petitioner on 17.10.2014, issuing demand notice confining the balance amount to be satisfied by the petitioner as `15,355/-. It is stated that, the said figure has been worked out in conformity with the relevant provisions of law.
4. After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is WP(c). No.26478 of 2014 3 disposed of, directing the petitioner to satisfy only the aforesaid modified extent of liability to the tune of `15,355/-, which shall be cleared within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Pn