TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... DTZ 4450820 which was a commercial vehicle. It was originally financed by M/s. Tata Motors Finance Limited and purchased by one Hasumatiben Rathwa. Since the original owner - Hasmutiben Rathwa defaulted in making payment to the financier, the financier - M/s. Tata Motors Finance Limited repossessed the said vehicle. Subsequently, such vehicle was sold to the petitioner who applied for registration. The RTO authorities raised two objections to register such vehicle viz. that the motor vehicle taxes of such vehicle were not paid and unless a total tax of Rs. 2,40,000/- was paid the RTO authorities were not inclined to register the vehicle in the name of the petitioner. The second objection was that the petitioner had not produced a certificate of road worthiness in Form No. 22. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned decision of the RTO Authorities in not registering the aforesaid vehicle in the name of the petitioner, which was refused on the aforesaid two grounds. 3. Shri Ramkrishna Dave, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has vehemently submitted that a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... rendered in Special Civil Application No. 10050/2011 and in the case of State of Gujarat thro' Secretary & Ors. v. Mono Steels (India) Ltd. & Anr. reported in 2014(35) GHJ 389, it is requested to allow the present petition and grant the reliefs as prayed for. 3.4 It is submitted that pursuant to the interim order dated 10.12.2012 passed by the Division Bench of this Court, on deposit of entire amount of tax demanded i.e. Rs. 2,40,000/- the vehicle has been registered in the name of the petitioner. It is submitted that therefore once the prayer to set aside the impugned demand is granted and the same is set aside the petitioner shall be entitled to the refund of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,40,000/-. Therefore, he has requested to pass appropriate order accordingly. 4. Present petition is vehemently opposed by Shri Hardik Vora, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the RTO authorities. Relying upon sub-section (1) of section 4 read with Section 8 of the Act, 1958, it is submitted that once the vehicle was put to use the liability to pay the tax arises. It is submitted that if the financier subsequently repossess the vehicle and the said vehicle was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner on the ground that the petitioner had not produced the certificate issued by the manufacturer in Form No. 22 is concerned, it is required to be noted that as such the petitioner had produced the certificate of the manufacturer in Form No. 22A. Such a certificate was required to show that the vehicle is roadworthy. If the vehicle is sent for bodybuilding work outside the place of the manufacturer, in that case such a certificate is required to be issued in Form No. 22A, which is required to be signed and issued by the manufacturer as well as bodybuilder. However, the purpose and object is to see that the certificate of road worthiness is issued. In the present case it is the case on behalf of the petitioner that vehicle in question was never send to bodybuilder for any bodybuilding work outside. Therefore, the certificate of road worthiness in Form No. 22 only was required. However, through oversight and by mistake it appears that the petitioner produced the certificate from the manufacturer in Form No. 22A, which in substance can be said to be a certificate of road worthiness. Under the circumstances, it can be said that the requirement of producing the certificate of road wort....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed. 5.3 Now, so far as the liability of the tax to be paid by the petitioner is concerned and the submission on behalf of the petitioner that considering sub-section (2) of section 3 for the period prior to refusal of the certificate of registration, there shall not be any liability is concerned, the aforesaid has no substance. It is required to be noted that considering sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Act, 1958, once the vehicle is transferred and put to use the liability to pay the tax arise. If the vehicle is repossessed by the financier subsequently, in that case the remedy available to such financier would be by submitting an appropriate application before the appropriate authority of non-use of such vehicle and for the period of such non-use the liability to pay the tax shall not arise. Otherwise the liability to pay the tax continues. 5.4 Section 4(1) of the Act, 1958 provides that the tax is required to be paid in advance by every registered owner, or any person having possession or control, of such motor vehicles. Section 8 of the Act, 1958 provides that if the tax leviable in respect of any motor vehicle remains unpaid by any person liable for the payment thereo....