Motor vehicle classification under entry tax law depends on the statute's own definition, not prior sales tax treatment.

The Karnataka Entry Tax Act creates a separate charging scheme for goods and motor vehicles, and the term "motor vehicle" is determined by its own definition under the Act read with the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Earlier sales tax rulings treating vibratory compactors as earth-moving machinery were not controlling because they arose under a different statute with a different classification structure. Absence of a registration certificate does not by itself exclude a compactor from motor-vehicle treatment if it otherwise fits the statutory definition. The discussion is reinforced by authority indicating that machines adapted for road use may still qualify as motor vehicles for entry tax purposes, making the statutory definition decisive for liability.

---

---

Issues: Whether L & T 752 vibratory compactor is a motor vehicle or machinery and whether it is liable to tax under the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the scheme of the Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods Act, 1979. The Act separately deals with entry tax on goods under Section 3 and with tax on motor vehicles under Section 4B. The expression "motor vehicle" in Section 4A(d) adopts the meaning in Section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, namely a mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads and liable for registration, subject to the statutory exclusions. The earlier decisions under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, which treated vibratory compactors as earth-moving machinery for classification under the schedule entries there, were held not to control the present issue because the KTEG Act contains an independent definition and separate charging scheme. The fact that the compactor was not produced with a registration certificate did not by itself take it outside Section 4B if, in law, it answered the statutory definition of motor vehicle. The Supreme Court ruling on excavators and road rollers supported the view that machines adapted for road use may still be motor vehicles for entry tax purposes.

Conclusion: The vibratory compactor was held to fall within the definition of motor vehicle under the KTEG Act and not to be taxable as mere machinery under Section 3; the substantial question of law was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special entry tax statute contains its own definition of motor vehicle and a separate charging provision for such vehicles, classification under a different sales tax enactment does not govern; the statutory definition under the entry tax law is ative of liability.

---