TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Interstate transient vehicles not liable for taxation under Taxation Act.</h1> <h3>STATE OF MYSORE & ORS. Versus T.V. SUNDARAM IYENGAR & SONS (P) LTD.</h3> The Supreme Court held that motor vehicles passing through the State of Mysore to reach another state are not considered 'kept' in Mysore under the ... - Issues:Whether a motor vehicle passing through the territory of the State of Mysore on the way to another State is considered 'kept' in Mysore under Section 3(1) of the Mysore Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957.Analysis:The case involved a dispute regarding the taxation of motor vehicles passing through the State of Mysore to reach their destination in another state. The appellant argued that such vehicles should be taxable under Section 3(2) of the Taxation Act as they use the roads of Mysore during their journey. However, the High Court held that vehicles merely passing through Mysore are not 'kept' in the state and are not taxable. The Supreme Court analyzed the interpretation of the term 'kept' in the context of the Taxation Act.The Supreme Court interpreted the term 'kept' in its ordinary sense, emphasizing that it implies a certain degree of stationariness or retention. The Court highlighted that the word 'kept' in the context of the Act suggests more than a mere transient presence or a halt during transit. The Court rejected the appellant's argument that any vehicle capable of road use, even if briefly present in Mysore, should be taxable under Section 3(2), as it would lead to an unreasonable outcome.Drawing parallels from English court decisions, the Supreme Court emphasized that the concept of 'keeping' a vehicle involves a continuous process or a significant interval of time. Citing the cases of Dudley v. Holland and Biggs v. Mitchell, the Court concluded that a vehicle in transit through Mysore or making a necessary halt during the journey cannot be considered 'kept' for road use in Mysore. Therefore, the Court upheld the High Court's interpretation of Section 3 of the Taxation Act and dismissed the appeal, with each party bearing their own costs.In conclusion, the Supreme Court clarified that motor vehicles merely passing through the State of Mysore without being stationed or retained for a significant period cannot be deemed 'kept' in the state for the purpose of taxation under the Mysore Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
