IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 26630 of 2008(T) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.V.JOSEPH, S/O.T.C.VARGHESE THAZHAMPILATH,PAIPPADU, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SASI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,RPERSENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO FINANCE,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 26630 OF 2008 T -------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd October, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenges Exts.P3 and P6. He seeks a declaration that he is not liable to pay tax or penalty or both for the years 2001, 2002 and subsequent years upto 2008. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is the Proprietor and Trainer of a Driving School. He submitted G Forms which were acknowledged by Exts.P2(A) and P2(B). Due to serious technical reason, the vehicle was not plying for the last eight years from 31.3.2001. Then the petitioner came to be served with Ext.P3 notice dated 15.11.2007 for paying Rs.31,060/= with nine per cent interest. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation. This Court passed Ext.P5 interim order to accept tax in respect of the petitioner's vehicles including the vehicle bearing No.KL-03/A-2000 at the rate of Rs.500/= applicable to driving school vehicle. Ext.P6 is another demand notice dated 8.8.2008. Petitioner submits that WPC.26630/08 T 2 the second respondent neither considered the order fixing Rs.500/=, nor considered the legal aspect of G Forms. Accordingly, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition. 2. A Statement is filed on behalf of the second respondent. Ext.R2(a) is a calculation statement. Ext.R2(b) is a copy of the intimation in Form G. It is, inter alia, stated as follows: “6. It is submitted that the acknowledgment of prior intimation (Form G) dated 03/04/2001 is received by this Office and tax exemption granted based on the due verification of the non use within the circle Officer from 01/04/2001 to 31/03/2002. But, Ext.P2(B) is actually a previous intimation (form G) submitted by the applicant on 03/07/2000 requesting a tax exemption for one quarter ie. from 01/07/2000 to 30/09/2000. In this case, proper enquiry have been conducted and granted exemption. The details of the above exemptions are entered in the respective stoppage register of this Office. The acknowledgment dated 03/07/2000 is claimed as acknowledgment dated 03/07/2002. This has to be put to strict proof. A copy of the intimation in Form G received in this Office on 03.07.2000 is WPC.26630/08 T 3 produced herewith and marked as Ext.R2(b). No previous intimation referred in Sec.5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act to claim the tax exemption for any other period is submitted to this authority. As per the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act if no previous intimation (Form G) filed regarding a vehicle, it is deemed to be a vehicle used or kept for use in this State and liable to be taxed.” 3. Petitioner filed a Reply Affidavit wherein he has also taken the stand that imposition of tax at the rate of Rs.500/= for the period from 1.4.1993 to 31.12.1996 is void and it is settled law that vehicles adapted exclusively for imparting instruction in driving school cannot be taxed at the enhanced rate. It is stated that the second respondent did not apply his mind in appreciating Exts.P2(A) and P2(B) G Forms. Ext.P7 is a copy of the relevant portion of the Finance Bill of 1977 as per which it was intended to impose surcharge only in respect of motor vehicles referred to in sub item (ii) of item 7 of the Schedule. 4. I heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The first question to be considered is as to WPC.26630/08 T 4 what is the effect of the applications seeking exemption as evidenced by Exts.P2(A) and P2(B). As far as the application as evidenced by Ext.P2(B) is concerned, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R2(b), exemption was sought for the period from 01.07.2000 to 30.09.2000. A perusal of Ext.R2(a) details of tax arrears would show that exemption has been granted for the period from 1.7.2000 to 30.9.2000 on the basis of G Form. As far as Ext.R2(a) is concerned, it will again show that exemption has been granted for the period from 1.4.2001 to 31.3.2002. Even according to petitioner, the application was filed on 3.4.2001. Therefore, I do not see any merit in the contention that exemption was not granted for the earlier period. Exemption has been granted for the period for which it was actually sought for. 5. As far as the non-compliance with Ext.P5 interim order of this Court is concerned, it is categorically stated that tax has been collected at the rate indicated in Ext.P5 interim order, which interim order has been confirmed by the disposal of the WPC.26630/08 T 5 Writ Petition. In such circumstances, I see no merit in the Writ Petition and it is accordingly dismissed. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge