Entry tax exemption for out-of-state vehicle applied where original registration was older than the statutory period before import into Tamil Nadu.

An imported hydraulic mobile crane was treated as a motor vehicle for purposes of the Tamil Nadu entry tax law because the State definition tracked the Motor Vehicles Act and the crane had been registered as a motor vehicle in Puducherry, unlike road-incompatible machinery such as excavators. The proviso to section 3(1), however, exempted vehicles brought into Tamil Nadu after the stipulated period from original registration in another State or Union Territory. As the crane was first registered in 1994 and entered Tamil Nadu only in 1998, the exemption applied even though it had not been transferred into the importer's name earlier at the place of origin. The assessment of entry tax and penalty was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported hydraulic mobile crane was a motor vehicle liable to entry tax under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990. (ii) Whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption under the proviso to section 3(1) of the Act because the vehicle had been registered more than 15/18 months before its entry into Tamil Nadu.

Issue (i): Whether the imported hydraulic mobile crane was a motor vehicle liable to entry tax under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990.

Analysis: The definition of "motor vehicle" under section 2(i) of the State Act is linked to section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The earlier decision relied on by the petitioner concerned excavators that were not suitable for use on public roads. On the facts here, the crane had been registered as a motor vehicle in Puducherry and was treated as a registered vehicle, not as a road-incompatible machine of the kind considered in the earlier excavator case.

Conclusion: The crane was not excluded from the statutory scheme on the ground urged by the petitioner, and the challenge on that basis failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to exemption under the proviso to section 3(1) of the Act because the vehicle had been registered more than 15/18 months before its entry into Tamil Nadu.

Analysis: Section 3(1) is the charging provision, but its proviso denies levy where a vehicle registered in another Union Territory or State is brought into Tamil Nadu after the stipulated period from the date of registration. The vehicle was first registered in 1994 and was brought into Tamil Nadu only in 1998, so the statutory period had already expired. Prior transfer into the petitioner's name in the Union Territory was not required for the exemption.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the proviso and no entry tax could be levied.

Final Conclusion: The assessment demanding entry tax and penalty was unsustainable and was set aside, with consequential relief granted to the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a vehicle registered in another Union Territory or State is brought into Tamil Nadu after the expiry of the statutory period from the date of its original registration, entry tax cannot be levied under section 3(1) notwithstanding that the vehicle was not previously transferred into the importer's name in the place of origin.

---