Allowed

Biswajit Mohanty v. R.T.O.,Bhubaneswar

Orissa HC18 Mar 2016WP(C)/4880/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging an auction purchaser's liability for tax and penalty. Relying on Section 12 of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975, the court held the transferee liable only for unpaid tax. It directed the R.T.O. to accept the tax before transferring the vehicle to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Directed the R.T.O., Bhubaneswar to accept the unpaid tax and thereafter transfer the vehicle in the petitioner's name.

Biswajit Mohanty Vs R.T.O.,Bhubaneswar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

WP(C) No.4880 of 2016
 18.3.2016

¶2

 Heard Mr. Sarangi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sharma, learned Standing
 Counsel for the Transport Department.

¶3

 Assailing the action of the R.T.O., Bhubaneswar, opposite party no.1, in deman
ding tax and penalty, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶4

 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an auction p
urchaser and he is not liable to pay any penalty. Thus issuance of notice demanding penalty is
 bad in law.

¶5

 Section 12 of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975 (in short, the Act)
 deals with liability of successor to pay arrears. The same is quoted hereunder:
12. Liability of successor to pay arrears (1) if the tax leviable in respect of any motor veh
icle unpaid by any person liable for payment thereof and such person before having paid the ta
x has transferred the ownership of such vehicle or has ceased to be in possession or control o
f such vehicle, the person to whom the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred or the pe
rson who has possession or control of such vehicle shall be liable to pay the said tax to the
Taxing Officer.

¶6

 (2) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to [affect] the liability of the
 person who has transferred the ownership or has ceased to be in possession or control of such
 vehicle, for payment of the said tax.

¶7

 On a conspectus of Section 12(1) of the Act, it is evident that the transferee
 of vehicle is liable to pay unpaid tax in the event the same has not been paid by the owner o
f the vehicle.

¶8

 In Bachan Singh v. The Road Transport Officer, Rourkela and others, 2009 (II)
OLR 183, a Division Bench of this Court succinctly dealt with the law on the subject. It was h
eld that a transferee of the vehicle or the person who is in possession or control of the vehi
cle shall be liable to pay the arrears of tax payable by the previous owner or the person who
had possession or control of such vehicle and remained unpaid at the time of transfer of the v
ehicle.

¶9

 Thus the irresistible conclusion is that the petitioner is only liable to pay

¶10

tax.

¶11

 In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the
opposite party no.1 to accept the tax and thereafter transfer the vehicle in the name of the p
etitioner.

¶12

Biswajit Mohanty v. R.T.O.,Bhubaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswajit Mohanty v. R.T.O.,Bhubaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Bilash Panda Vs Union of India

Gurudev Sahoo Vs Tax Recovery Officer-Cum-Rto,Cuttack

Santilata Muduli Vs State of Orissa

Santosh Ku.Behera Vs State of Odisha

Ganesh Pr.Pradhan Vs State of Orissa

Ramesh Ch Pradhan Vs State of Odisha