Allowed

Venkaeshwara Rao Ventrapragada v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC17 Oct 2019WP/22512/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged demand for additional life tax on a Mercedes Benz car based on ex-showroom price versus invoice value. Court allowed writ petition following earlier decisions, directing registration status quo and permitting only delayed registration penal charges.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to register Mercedes Benz Car without demanding additional life tax; petitioner to pay penal charges for delay in registration only.

Venkaeshwara Rao Ventrapragada Vs State of Telangana — Consumer Protection | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.22512 OF 2019

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Transport.

¶4

Petitioner claims to have purchased Mercedes Benz Car from M/s. Raam Autobahn India Private Limited for an invoice of Rs.80,76,900/-. At the time of purchase, petitioner claims to have paid life tax of Rs.11,30,770/- and he was given temporary registration number as TS 09 CNTR 0197. Subsequently, when petitioner approached the respondents to register his vehicle permanently, he was asked to deposit excess amount of Rs.98,000/- on ex-showroom price towards life tax holding that petitioner paid less amount than the tax payable on ex-showroom price of the vehicle. According to petitioner, life tax is payable on the invoice, but not on the ex-showroom price and therefore petitioner is not required to pay the additional tax demanded.

¶5

In support of the claim that petitioner is not required to pay additional amount demanded by the respondents, he placed reliance on the decision in W.P.No.5286 of 2018, dated 02.05.2018, which was upheld by the Division Bench in W.A.No.805 of 2018, dated 29.01.2019.

¶6

Learned Single Judge of this Court held that the State cannot be allowed to levy life tax on the ex-showroom price shown in the price list, when it is not the actual cost of the vehicle and the life tax has to be levied on the actual cost of the vehicle as paid by the purchaser of the vehicle which can be reflected from the

¶7

¶8

invoice. This view of learned Single Judge was upheld by the Division Bench of this Court.

¶9

Learned Government Pleader does not dispute the fact that the issue is covered by the decision referred to above.

¶10

Following the earlier decision in W.P.No.5286 of 2018 dated 02.05.2018, this Writ Petition is also allowed directing the respondents to register the Mercedes Benz Car without demanding additional life tax, if the life tax already paid based on the invoice dated 17.08.2019 is as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the vehicle is fulfilling all other parameters for registration. Since the sale invoice is dated 17.08.2019 and the vehicle was not registered within 30 days from the date of temporary registration, petitioner may have to pay the penal charges for the delay in registration of the vehicle as levied and determined by the respondent authorities when the vehicle is presented for permanent registration. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

P.NAVEEN RAO, J

¶12

Date:17.10.2019 KH

Venkaeshwara Rao Ventrapragada v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkaeshwara Rao Ventrapragada v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Peers Constructions Vs The State of Telangana

M.v.Ramakrishna Rao and 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Sonule Mondi Vs The State of Telanana

V.G. Gyaneshwar Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others

N. Venkateswara Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt Kathula Radhabai Vs The State of Telangana