Allowed

Latchamsetty Sanjay v. State of Telangana and 2 Others

Telangana HC7 Nov 2019WP/24366/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a writ petition challenging the demand for additional life tax on ex-showroom price. Followed precedent requiring life tax on invoice price. Directed registration without additional tax if invoice compliance met.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to register petitioner's vehicle without demanding additional life tax pending pending miscellaneous petitions.

Latchamsetty Sanjay Vs State of Telangana and 2 Others — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.24366 OF 2019

¶3

Dated:07.11.2019

¶4

Between:

¶5

Latchamsetty Sanjay, S/o. Sundara Rao Latchamsetty .. Petitioner And

¶6

State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents

¶7

This Court made the following:

¶8

¶9

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.24366 OF 2019

¶10

ORDER :

¶11

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

¶12

Petitioner claims to have purchased MERCEDES BENZ Make SKD X-156 GLA 200 Edition 589 111 for an invoice of Rs.28,69,000/-. At the time of purchase, petitioner claims to have paid life tax of Rs.4,01,660/- and was given temporary registration number as TS 09 CQTR 9949. Subsequently, when the petitioner approached the respondents to register the vehicle permanently, he was asked to pay life tax on ex-show room price of the vehicle instead of the net invoice price. According to petitioner, life tax is payable on the invoice, but not on the exshowroom price and therefore petitioner is not required to pay the additional tax demanded.

¶13

In support of the claim that petitioner is not required to pay additional amount demanded by the respondents, learned counsel 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.

¶14

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

¶15

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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 MERCEDES BENZ Make SKD X-156 GLA 200 Edition 589 111 of the petitioner without demanding additional life tax, if the life tax already paid based on the invoice dated 18.10.2019 is as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the vehicle is fulfilling all other parameters for registration. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶19

closed.
____________________
P.NAVEEN RAO, J
Date:07.11.2019
KH

Latchamsetty Sanjay v. State of Telangana and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Latchamsetty Sanjay v. State of Telangana and 2 Others

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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Pradeep Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Chintalapally Manjula W/o. C. Ramdev Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana, Rep.

Goshikonda Swetha Vs State of Telangana, and 4 others

Baragada China Venkaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

M/s. Sreelatha Plasticcs Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Potla Venkateswarlu, Venkataiah Vs The State of Telangana