Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This appeal is against the order of the learned single Judge dated 28-1-2000 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 180/2000.

2. The petitioners carry on the business of manufacturing and selling of cement and for the purpose of their business they have also been granted mining lease for lime stone in respect of the land situated in village Bharda Jai, Surjna, Nagri in tehsil Chittorgarh. According to the petitioners they have installed crusher in the mining area itself for crushing lime stone excavated from the mines and there is public road in the mining area of the petitioners, which is in the exclusive possession and control of the petitioners. For the purpose of carrying lime stone from mines to the crusher within that area they have acquired heavy earth moving equipments known as Dumpers. The total number of such machines acquired from time to time is 27. In the petition, out of which this appeal arises, demand notices Annexure 4/1 to 4/27, raised under the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. 1954, are under challenge. All these notices relate to demand for tax under the Act for the period commencing from 1-4-1997 to 31-3-2000 and have been raised by notices dated 11th Jan. 2000. The petitioners have challenged the said demand notices on the ground that machines/dumpers are not 'motor vehicle' within the meaning of Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951 for the purpose of levying tax thereon though they are registrable under the Motor Vehicles, Act, 1988 and that the demand notices have been issued without first assessing the liability of the petitioners to tax. without affording any opportunity of hearing, demand notices have been issued directly without preceding assessment of tax.

Thereafter when 1939 Act was repealed with the commencement of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 the definition was further substituted vide Rajasthan Act No. 14 of 1990 and the clause (e) reads now as under:--

"(e) Words and expressions used but not defined in this Act and defined in Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988) and Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, shall have the meaning assigned to them in that Act and Rules as amended from time to time."

31. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that the vehicles having been registered under the Motor Vehicles Act, about which there is no dispute, the levy of tax on the vehicles in question as motor vehicle is automatic. It is not open for the appellants now to dispute that the dumpers in question are not motor vehicles within the meaning of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as per the definition that exists during the relevant period since 1982. Prior to the amendment by making the applicability of the definitions of the Motor Vehicles Act as amended from time to time, the Court has taken the view that by making a reference to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, at the time of enactment of the Act, the legislature had adopted the well known method of legislating by incorporating the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act by reference. Therefore, for the purposes of Motor Vehicles Act, the definitions as it existed on the date the Act came into force, is to be considered as if enacted in the Act of 1951 itself and subsequent amendments in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 would not affect the definitions for the purposes of Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1951. The decision of Supreme Court in AIR 1975 SC 17 as followed by this Court in 1980 WLN (UC) 375 in the case of this very petitioner does not assist the petitioner. The dumpers which have been registered under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 or 1939 as motorvehicles have to be treated motor vehicles for the purposes of the taxation also.

47. The question again cropped up before the Supreme Court whether the dumpers and rockers run on rubber tyres are adapted for use on roads under the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act in Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. State of Orissa, AIR 1992 SC 1371 and Union of India v. Chowgule and Co. Pvt. Ltd., AIR 1992 SC 1376. In Central Coal Fields Limited, the Court noticed that anticipating a spate of refund applications as a result of Bolani's case (AIR 1975 SC 17) the Governor of the State of Orissa promulgated an Ordinance on 11-2-75 by defining the 'motor vehicle' under the Taxation Act with retrospective effect bringing it in conformity with the definition given in the Motor Vehicles Act by the amendment of 1956 referred to above. Considering that the plain and clear object of the amendment was to legislate retrospectively on the subject directly Instead of by incorporation, as done earlier, so as to bring uniformity in the post amendment effect of Section 2(18) of the Act and therefore, the effect of Bolani Ores case to the extent the vehicles of any kind used solely on the premises of the owner were not treated motor vehicles, was nullified by amending the provisions of the Act Itself. The Court in Central Coal Fields case was dealing with the amended provisions of the Orissa Act where the actual user did not exclude the dumpers in question before the Court from the definition of motor vehicle' if other wise it can be held that they are adapted for use on public roads. It is relevant to notice that the decision in Central Coal Fields Limited was rendered only on facts of the case but did not lay down that in all cases and in all circumstances the dumpers or rockers are vehicles. The Court said (Para 8 of AIR 1992 SC 1371) :--

On the facts situation, we have no hesitation in holding that the High Court was right in concluding that Dumpers and rockers are vehicles adapted or suitable for use on roads and being motor vehicles per se. as held in Bolani Ores case, were liable to taxation on the footing of their use or kept for use on public roads; the network of which the State spreads, maintains it and keeps available for use of motor vehicles and hence entitled to a regulatory and compensatory tax,

48. This decision in Central Coal Fields (AIR 1992 SC 1371) was followed in Chowgule and Co. (AIR 1992 SC 1376) arising under the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1965 as was made applicable to Union Territories of Goa, Daman and Diu with effect from 1-1-65. In both the cases, the Court on facts found that the dumpers in question were adapted for use on public roads. The question whether the dumpers in question are of special type adapted for use in factory or any other enclosed premises, the Court was not called upon to determine in either of the cases.