Compensatory vehicle tax cannot impose extra proof burden on omnibus owners for refund beyond non-use safeguards.

The compensatory nature of motor vehicle tax meant that tax was chargeable only on vehicles used or kept for use on public roads, with refund available when non-use was shown. The Gujarat amendment to Section 3-A(5)(b), which required an omnibus owner to prove that non-use beyond three months was due to reasons beyond control, imposed a condition unrelated to the levy's compensatory character. The Court held that existing statutory safeguards already addressed verification of non-use and misuse, and that a mere apprehension of evasion could not justify singling out omnibuses for an additional burden. The impugned condition was therefore invalid and beyond State legislative competence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition in Section 3-A(5)(b) of the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1958, as amended by the Bombay Motor Vehicles Tax (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1992, requiring proof that non-use of a designated omnibus beyond three months was for reasons beyond the control of the owner, was ultra vires Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The tax under the Act is compensatory in nature and is levied on vehicles used or kept for use on public roads. Where a vehicle is not used, tax already paid is refundable, and the statute permits advance collection to prevent evasion. The amendment restricting refund beyond three months was introduced to curb clandestine use and loss of revenue, but the statutory machinery already provided adequate safeguards to verify non-use and to punish misuse. The impugned condition singled out omnibuses and imposed an additional requirement unrelated to the compensatory character of the levy. Mere apprehension of evasion could not justify insisting on proof of reasons beyond the owner's control.

Conclusion: The condition was held to be invalid and beyond the legislative competence of the State, and the challenge to the amended provision failed.

---