Disposed

Mr. T. Ramakrishna v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Sept 2021WP/19085/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a contract carriage bus owner, faced a tax and penalty demand for two quarters where the vehicle was not used due to the pandemic. The court held that Rule 12-A is merely one method to demonstrate non-use. It disposed of the petition directing payment of tax for both quarters, with an enquiry ordered to decide on the penalty for the first quarter.

What did the court decide?

Directing the petitioner to pay tax for the quarters ending 30.06.2021 and 30.09.2021; directing the second respondent to conduct an enquiry into the penalty imposition for the quarter ending 30.06.20

Mr. T. Ramakrishna Vs the State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION No.19085 of 2021

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The petitioner is the owner of a Contract Carriage Bus bearing registration No.KL-03-M-1800. This vehicle was stopped by the Transport Department Authorities on 12.08.2021, when the vehicle was found to be transporting a marriage party from Byreddypalli to Kanipakam of Chittoor District. In the course of the verification of the documents, it was found that the quarterly tax from 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 and the quarterly tax from 01.07.2021 to 30.09.2021 had not been paid. On this ground, the vehicle was initially detained and later released. However, a demand has been raised against the petitioner for payment of tax for these two quarters and for payment of penalty.

¶4

It is the case of the petitioner that on account of the second wave of the Covid-19 Pandemic, the petitioner had not used the vehicle or kept the vehicle for use within the state of Andhra Pradesh for the quarter ending 30.06.2021. The petitioner states that the respondent authorities are insisting on payment of quarterly tax for this quarter along with penalty, even though the petitioner had filed a representation requesting the respondent authorities not to collect the tax or penalty for the quarter ending 30.06.2021.

¶5

In view of the fact that the petitioner did not choose to intimate the authorities, under Rule 12-A of the Andhra

¶6

¶7

Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1963 that the said vehicle would not be kept for use, the learned Government Pleader for Transport submits that the petitioner would not be entitled for any exemption for payment of tax for both quarters, and as such, the respondent authorities are entitled to insist for payment of tax and penalty.

¶8

Heard Sri E.Maruthi Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport.

¶9

This Court by orders dated 01.09.2021 in W.P.No.13780 of 2021 and batch, had held that the scheme available under Rule 12-A of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1963 is only one method of demonstration that the owner of a vehicle has not used the vehicle or kept the vehicle for use, as required under Section 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963.

¶10

In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pay the tax for the quarter ending 30.06.2021 and the quarter ending 30.09.2021. Upon such payment, the respondents shall permit the petitioner to operate his Contract Carriage Bus bearing registration No.KL03-M-1800. The 2^nd respondent shall also conduct an enquiry into the question as to whether the petitioner had used or kept the vehicle for use for the quarter ending 30.06.2021 and decide on the imposition of tax for the quarter ending 30.06.2021 and the consequent penalty that is sought to be levied for non payment of such tax and compounding fee.

¶11

¶12