IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 22839 of 1999 Between: Mohd Sadiq Ali S/o. Mahmod Ali National Travels Office, Shikwadi, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Licensing Officer Karimnagar, Office of the Regional Transport Officer Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector (Enforcement) Nellore, Officer of the Regional Transport Officer, Nellore, Nellore District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of CERTIORARI by calling for the records from the file of the Ist respondent in R.No: 1590/A2/98 and QUASH his demand notice dated: 5.10.1999 made therein, demanding a sum of Rs.1,22,500/- as difference of tax, from the petitioner for the quarter ending 31.12.1998 in respect of his contract carriage bus AP-20-T.333 and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and just in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: SPL GP FOR TAXES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.V. SANJAY KUMAR W.P.No. 22839 of 1999 Oral Order: (Per: GR, J) The petitioner’s vehicle – a contract carriage bus bearing registration No. AP-20-T.333 was inspected, detained and seized on 28-12-1998 while proceeding from Gudur to Karimnagar on the ground that it was plying without permit and for other violations. The permit expired on 27-12- 1998. Assailing the seizure, the petitioner filed W.P.No. 36627 of 1998. The writ petition was disposed of on 30-12-1998 directing release of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner on his depositing a sum of Rs.5,000-00 and furnishing an undertaking not to alienate the vehicle pending final orders to be passed by the authorities. The vehicle was released on 31-12-1998. The respondent issued a show cause notice dated 31-12-1998 calling upon the petitioner to show cause why an amount of Rs.1,27,500-00 should not be collected at the rate of Rs.2,500-00 per seat per the quarter ending 31-12- 1998 for having plied the vehicle without payment of tax when checked on 28-12-1998. The petitioner submitted his explanation thereto inter alia pleading that the respondents failed to deduct from the determined tax liability of the petitioner an amount of Rs.56,249-00 paid by the petitioner as tax on the vehicle for the quarter ending 31-12-1998 as also an amount of Rs.510-00 paid towards regular tax (i.e., without deducting an amount of Rs. 56,759-00). In the writ petition, by the order dated 02-11-1999 in W.P.M.P.No.28624 of 1999, this Court granted interim stay of the demand by the 1st respondent on condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.33,000-00 within a period of four weeks. Belatedly though and on seeking condonation of the delay, the amount of Rs.33,000-00 is sated to have been deposited by the petitioner, in compliance with the conditional interim order passed by this Court. According to the petitioner, of the total tax demanded at Rs.1,27,500-00, an amount of Rs.5,000-00 was already deposited; the petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of the amount of Rs.56,759-00 representing the pro rata tax and regular tax paid for the quarter ending 31-12-1998 and is further entitled to take credit for the amount of Rs.33,000-00 paid pursuant to the conditional interim order passed on 02- 11-1999 in this writ petition. Eventually, the liability of the petitioner under the impugned demand notice is thus Rs.32,741-00. Though the petitioner specifically alleged in Ground-G of the writ petition that he has paid the pro rata tax of Rs.56,249-00 and the regular tax of Rs.510-00 for the quarter ending 31-12-1998 and is entitled to take credit therefor, the counter affidavit does not dispute this contention and claim of the petitioner and on application of the principle of ‘non-traverse’, the petitioner is seen entitled to take credits for these payments made. Accordingly, the petitioner’s resultant liability as per the impugned demand notice is recorded as Rs.32,741-00 (Rupees Thirty two thousands seven hundred and forty one only) and the petitioner shall be liable to pay the said amount in favour of the 1st respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J _________________________ P.V. SANJAY KUMAR, J Dated: 29-12-2008 Pvks