The High Court of Kerala has held that clause 10(iii) of the schedule of Kerala Motor Automobiles Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) states that construction equipment vehicles exclusively used for construction purposes including goods vehicles attached with any construction equipment as well are considered liable for tax levy.
Brief Facts of the Case:
The Petitioner, who owns two automobiles had filed notifications and orders under the Act, and its relevant rules requesting a tax of 8% of the purchase price on these vehicles.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Petitioner's vehicles are registered as goods transport vehicles and have been taxed at the appropriate rates. The tax demand on construction equipment has increased. The Petitioner bought a cab chassis for building purposes and was required to pay tax under the Act. Construction equipment vehicles, according to the counsel, should be stationary and employed only on the construction site, not on the road.
Contentions of the Respondent:
Ms Thushara James, the Senior Government Pleader, contends that the State has the authority to tax motor vehicles at the rates mentioned in the schedule and Annexure. She claims that vehicles used for construction, rather than goods carriage, are subject to taxation under Section 3 and Schedule 1 and Annexure 1.
Observations of the Court:
The High Court observed that the Petitioner's vehicles cannot be used as goods carriage vehicles, as they can only carry concrete mixture equipment on the road. The vehicle's use for construction purposes makes it liable for taxation at the rate prescribed for construction equipment vehicles. The construction equipment vehicles are liable for taxation under clause 10(iii) of the schedule.
The Decision of the Court:
The Court ruled that construction equipment vehicles, exclusively used for construction purposes, are liable for taxation. The Petitioner's vehicles are taxed at the prescribed rate for construction equipment vehicles, not goods carriage vehicles. The writ petition is dismissed due to lack of substance.
Case Title: Satheesh Kumar S. vs. Transport Commissioner and Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh
Case No.: WP(C) No. 3697 of 2022
Advocates for Petitioner: Adv. Joji George Jacob, Adv. Baby Kuriakose, Adv. Raajesh S. Subrahmanian, Adv. V.R. Rajesh
Advocate for Respondents: Adv. Thushara James- Sr. Gp.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
