Disposed

Rajiv Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2018WTAX/1508/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought quashing of an order imposing tax and penalty on a truck. The court directed the petitioner to approach the concerned authority via application for consideration and did not decide on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach concerned authority for reduction or exemption of penalty. Petition disposed without deciding merits.

Rajiv Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1508 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Rajiv Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Bajarang Bahadur Singh,Vinay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶6

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:-

¶7

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 03.05.2018 (Annexure No.2) passed by the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Motor Vehicle Department, Jaunpur-respondent no.2.

¶8

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to permit the petitioner to deposit the original tax due of Vehicle No. UP 62T 0913 Truck and not to insist the petitioner to deposit the penalty."

¶9

Perusal of the record shows that the petitioner has himself filed an application before the concerned authority to accept the arrears of tax due from 01.04.2015 till filing of the application. The respondent no.2 vide order dated 03.05.2018 directed the petitioner to deposit due tax to the tune of Rs. 78650/- as well as penalty amount to the tune of Rs. 61,107/totalling to Rs. 1,39,757/-

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved by the imposition of penalty and has stated that the respondent no.2 has ample powers under Section 24 of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1998, after assigning the reasons exempt or reduce the penalty amount upto 75% under sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the Act.

¶11

Be that as it may, the petitioner may approach the concerned authority by way of filing an appropriate application for reducing or exempting the penalty amount. In case, such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such application in accordance with law.

¶12

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case, it is for the concerned authority to decide the claim of the petitioner with regard to imposition of penalty.

¶13

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.11.2018 S.Ali

Rajiv Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Doon/ Diesel Sales and Service Vs Union of India and Another

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mansha Bind Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mahaveer Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Amit Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India and 4 Others

M/S Shiv Coal Trading Company Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others