IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 27070 of 2011(G) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- MAYILVAHANAM MOTORS, SHORNUR, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING PARTNER C.A.ABRAHAM (JR). BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNA MENON SRI.M.JITHESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER (TAXATION OFFICER), PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001. 2. THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL ZONE-1, THRISSUR, AYYANTHOLE, TRISSUR-3. 3. THE TRASNPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONARATE TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 014. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JAMES MATHEW KADAVAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.27070/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE IST RESPONDENT DTD. 03-06-2010 EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 21-08-2011 EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS MVARP NO.2/2011 DTD. 15-12-2010. EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 25-03-2011. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE VERIFIED PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 28.04.2011. EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 26.7.2011 EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT WHICH APPEARED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 24-12-2008. EXT.P8 THE FIR FILED IN RELATION TO THE OFFENCE WHICH WAS FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AS ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 27070 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the original appeallate and revisional orders passed under the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, whereby the petitioner's claim for exemption from tax by filing Form G application has been rejected. Form G application was rejected on the ground that as per the report of the Joint Regional Transport Officer, the vehicle was not found at the premises, where it was stated to be garaged as per Form G application. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that the vehicle was not at the garaged premises as per the G Form application, but it was towed to another safer place because of threat against the vehicle by certain persons in the wake of earlier incidents relating to other vehicles of the petitioner. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. On going through the orders, I am not satisfied that the petitioner can validly challenge the impugned orders. Admittedly, the vehicle was not in the place where as per the G Form the petitioner had garaged the vehicle. Very cogent reasons have also been stated in the orders as to why the contentions of the petitioner cannot be accepted. In Ext.P6 order, the revisional authority has held thus: “As per the records, Stage Carriage KL-09/G.963 is owned by the Managing Partner, Mayilvahanam Motors, Shornur. The vehicle is covered by a stage carriage permit valid from 18.6.2008 to 17.6.2013. Tax in respect of the vehicle is paid upto 30.6.09. G form was filed by the registered owner for the period from 1.9.2009 to 31.12.2009 on w.p.c.27070/11 - : 2 :- 7.9.2009 stating the place of garage as near the Police Station Agali. No G form filed for the period from 1.7.09 to 31.8.09. As per the Service Verification report of AMVI, Mammarkad dated 24.10.09 the vehicle was not found garaged at the place mentioned in the G form and based on this report tax was demanded by Regional Transport Officer, Palakkad for the period from 1.7.2009 to 31.12.2009. On further verification joint Regional Transport Officer, Mannarkad has reported that the vehicle KL-09/G. 963 was not seen garaged at the place mentioned in the G form as per the service verification report dated 24.10.2009. The vehicle was removed from the place of garage mentioned in the G Form without any prior sanction, which is against the provisions of Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and Rules. Hence the claim that the vehicle was not put on road cannot be accepted. More over the incident of burning of the buses owned by the petitioner firm happened on 23.12.2008 as per the FIR and G form for tax exemption is filed on 7.9.2009 i.e. after a gap of eight months. The claim that vehicle under question was removed from the place of garage without towing sanction was due to the above said incident is ambiguous. As per Section 5(2) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976, a person shall not be exempted from the liability to pay tax in respect of a motor vehicle, if, on verification, it is found that the motor vehicle has been used during such period or any portion thereof. On perusal of the records, it is seen that tax has been demanded only for the period for which non use intimation is not filed and for the period for which the vehicle was not seen garaged at the place of garage mentioned in the G form. As per Section 3 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 tax shall be levied on every motor vehicle used or kept for use in the State.” I cannot find any infirmity in the said reasoning. In the above circumstances, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge