Kerala High Court
Vairavan vs Joint Regional Transport Officer on 8 June, 2001
Equivalent citations: AIR 2001 KERALA 312, ILR(KER) 2001 (2) KER 568, (2001) 2 KER LT 564, (2002) 1 ACC 30
Author: Kurian Joseph
Bench: Kurian Joseph
ORDER Kurian Joseph, J.
1. The requirements of the valid intimation and mode of intimation for claiming exemption from payment of motor vehicle tax contemplated under S. 5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') arise for consideration in this case.
2. Appellant is the petitioner in the Original Petition. He is aggrieved by the demand of tax in respect of his vehicle KL-8/B 3510 from 1.9.1998. According to the petitioner the said bus which had regular permit was garaged from 1.9.1998 to 1.4.1999 at Poovambara Shree Krishna Workshop for carrying out body repair and engine work. Ext. P1 according to the petitioner, is the intimation sent by him to the 2nd respondent regarding garaging of the vehicle. Owing to financial difficulties he could not get the repairs done and the vehicle was not being used eversince 1.9.1998. And now that the vehicle is fit for operation, petitioner prayed that necessary fitness test may be directed to be conducted without insisting for the arrears of tax.
3. The learned Single Judge was not inclined to accept the prayers of the petitioner and hence granted only instalment facility to pay the tax in respect of the vehicle, the 1st instalment to start from 2.5.2001. Aggrieved, the Writ Appeal is filed.
4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that S. 5 of the Act seeks only of previous intimation in writing and hence Ext. P1 intimation having been served on the 2nd respondent, the appellant is entitled for exemption from tax. Ext. P1 allegedly sent by the appellant on 1.9.1998 contained the following particulars:-
1) The vehicle KL-8/B 3510 was garaged at Poovambara Sree Krishna Workshop since 1.9.1998.
2) Owing to financial difficulties, appellant was not able to get the repair works done and hence he was not in a position to operate the bus.
3) Exemption was sought from payment of vehicle's tax from 1.9.1998 till the vehicle is put to operation.
5. We are afraid, such an intimation may not be sufficient so as to comply with the requirements of S. 5 of the Act read with R. 10 of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). S. 5 of the Act reads as follows:-
"5. Exemption from tax.-
(1) In the case of a motor vehicle which is not intended to be used or kept for use during the first month or the first and second months of quarter, or the whole of a quarter or year, as the case may be, the registered owner or the person having possession or control of such vehicle shall give previous intimation in writing to the Regional Transport Officer from whom the endorsement of tax has been obtained, that such vehicle would not be used for such period and thereupon, the registered owner or such other person shall not be deemed to have used or kept for use the vehicle for such period, and no tax shall be payable in respect of such vehicle for such period.
(2) Nothing in sub-s. (1) shall exempt a person from liability to pay tax in respect of a motor vehicle, if, or verification, it is found that the motor vehicle has been used during such period or any portion thereof.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s. (1), in an appeal under S. 23 or a revision under S. 24, the burden of proving that a motor vehicle has not been used during any period shall be on the registered owner or the person having possession or control of the motor vehicle, as the case may be."
R. 10 of the Rules reads as follows:-
"10. Exemption from tax [(S. 5 (1)].-
(1) The previous intimation referred to in sub-s. (1) of S. 5 shall be made to the Regional Transport Officer concerned in From G or in writing with the particulars required therein so as to reach him within one week from the date of commencement of the period for which exemption from payment of tax in respect of the vehicle is claimed due to non-use.
(2) On receipt of the intimation, the Regional Transport Officer concerned shall certify, after such verification as may be deemed necessary, the non-use of the vehicle for the period for which tax is not payable, by making necessary endorsement in the certificate of registration of the vehicle.
Note.- The previous intimation referred to in this rule shall be sent be registered post acknowledgment due or presented to the office of the Regional Transport Officer, in person and in the latter case, acknowledgement for its receipt, shall be obtained."
A combined reading of S. 5 of the Act and R. 10 of the Rules would show that in order to claim exemption from payment of tax for the period the vehicle in not put to operation, either the intimation has to be given in the prescribed form (Form G) and it should be duly served or such an intimation in substitution of Form G should contain the particulars required under Form G and that should be duly served as per the Rules.
6. It has to be seen that it is not any intimation that is sufficient so as to substitute Form G which is the prescribed form under the Rules. Only if an intimation containing particulars required under Form G is given, one could claim exemption from payment of tax on the ground that he was not operating the vehicle. Form G contains the following particulars:-
FORM G INTIMATION OF NON-USE OF A VEHICLE (S. 5(1) of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Ordinance and R. 10 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Rules) To:
The Regional Transport Officer
1. Registration No. of the vehicle
2. Name and address of the owner of the vehicle
3. The place where the vehicle is garaged and the date of garaging
4. Probable date on which the vehicle will be put to use
5. Period upto which tax has been paid
6. Period fro which tax exemption is requested for
7. Remarks Place:
Date Signature of the Registered owner/person
in possession of the Vehicle
Acknowledgement
Received ..... from ..... in form G. an application for tax exemption in respect of (class of vehicle ..... (Identification No......) Official Seal Regional Transport Officer"
Ext. P1 evidently does not contain all the required particulars and hence the same cannot be acted upon.
7. There is yet another aspect to be noted in this case. It is not enough that the intimation is merely sent, since the mode of service is provided under the Note to R. 10. It is the case of the appellant that Ext. P1 was served by hand. Even then, as can be seen from the Note, the appellant has to get an acknowledgement and only in such a situation he can claim exemption from payment of tax. On the facts of the instant case, it may be seen admittedly with effect from 1.4.1999 to 31.3.2001 appellant has filed Form G itself. The benefit claimed by him under Ext. P1 is for the period from 1.9.1998 to 1.4.1999. Having not duly complied with the requirements of a valid intimation and the intimation having not been duly served, the appellant is not entitled to claim exemption of tax in respect of his vehicle for the period the same was allegedly garaged, i.e., from 1.9.1998. Only for the period for which Form G is duly filed or the intimation as contemplated under S. 5 of the Act read with R. 10 of the Rules is duly served on the authority, the appellant can claim exemption from tax.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant prayed for extension of the time granted by the learned Single Judge for payment of the first instalment. Appellant is granted time till 30.6.2001 for payment of the first instalment of the tax in respect of his vehicle.
Subject to the above modification, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.