Karnataka High Court

The Principal Secretary To ... vs Mr Ranjith K P on 27 July, 2023

Bench: Chief Justice, M.G.S. Kamal

                          1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

                         PRESENT
 THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
                              AND
          THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL


            WRIT APPEAL NO.191 OF 2023 (MV)
                              AND
            WRIT APPEAL NO.196 OF 2023 (MV)
IN WA. NO.191 OF 2023

BETWEEN :

1.    THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
      TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT
      GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
      # 253, 1ST FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING
      DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
      BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.    THE COMMISSIONER
      TRANSPORT AND ROAD SAFETY
      1ST FLOOR, A-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING
      SHANTINAGAR
      BENGALURU - 560 027.


3.    THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR
      TRANSPORT & SENIOR REGIONAL
      TRANSPORT OFFICE, BENGALURU (SOUTH)
      JAYANAGAR SHOOPING COMPLEX
      4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA
      BENGALURU - 560 011.

                                          ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MAHENDRA S.S., AGA)
                               2




AND:

1.   MR. RANJITH K.P.,
     S/O SRI. K.K. PEETHAMBRAN
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
     R/AT No.004, VISHAL PARK WOOD
     KESHAVARAJ LAYOUT
     CAMBRIDGE ROAD
     HALASURU
     BENGALURU - 560 008.


2.   THE JOINT SECRETARY
     MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT
     AND HIGHWAYS
     TRANSPORT BHAVAN 1
     PARLIAMENT STREET
     NEW DELHI - 110 001.


3.   NATIONAL INFORMATICS CENTRE
     KARNATAKA STATE UNIT
     VI AND VII FLOOR, MINI TOWER
     BENGALURU - 560 001.



                                            ...RESPONDENTS



(BY SRI. J. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
    SRI. H. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, ASG FOR R2)


       THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS. b) ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE
THE ORDER DATED:16.12.2022 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE    JUDGE   OF   THIS       HON'BLE   COURT   IN   WP
                          3




No.683/2022 (MV) C/W WRIT PETITION.NO.2153/2022
(MV) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.



IN WA NO.196 OF 2023


BETWEEN :


1.   THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE
     YESHWANTHPUR
     3RD FLOOR, SHOPING COMPLEX
     RAILWAY STATION ROAD
     YESHWANTHPUR
     BENGALURU - 560 022
     REP. BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER.


2.   THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT
     AND ROAD SAFETY
     1ST FLOOR, A-BLOCK
     TTMC BUILDING
     K.H. ROAD
     SHANTHINAGAR
     BENGALURU - 560 027.


3.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT
     3RD FLOOR
     M.S. BUILDING
     BENGALURU - 560 001
     REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.


                                       ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MAHENDRA S.S., AGA)
                            4




AND:



1.     MRS. SHALINI T.,
       AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
       D/O M.R. THANGAVELU A.,
       R/AT DV 117 IISC QUARTERS
       ISRO ROAD
       VIJINAPURA CAMPUS
       SANJAY NAGAR
       OPPOSITE TO ISRO HEAD QUARTERS
       BENGALURU - 560 094.

2.     UNION OF INDIA
       MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT
       AND HIGHWAYS
       TRANSPORT BHAVAN -1
       PARLIAMENT STREET
       NEW DELHI - 110 001
       REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. ANISHA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
    SRI. H. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, ASG FOR R2)


      THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO A) CALL
FOR RECORDS B) ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL AND SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:16.12.2022 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP
NO.683/2022 (MV) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.2153/2022
(MV) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY



       THESE APPEALS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED,
COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS
DAY, M.G.S.KAMAL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                  5




                          JUDGMENT

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

(hereinafter referred to as `MORTH'), Government of

India, by its Notification bearing No.GSR 594(E) dated

26.08.2021 as per Annexure-D introduced a new

registration mark for new motor vehicles called

Bharath Series (hereinafter referred to as "BH Series"),

process of which would not require assignment of new

registration mark, if the owner of the vehicle moves

from one State to another. The said facility was made

available on voluntary basis to defence personnel,

employees of Central Government/State Government,

Central/State Government Public Sector undertakings,

private sector companies/organisation, which are

having their offices in four or more States/Union

Territories.

2. In furtherance to the said notification, the

appellant No.2- Commissioner of Transport, Road

Safety, Bengaluru, had issued a communication

bearing No.TC/Regn.-1-PR-412/2021-22 dated

20.12.2021, as per Annexure-G to register new non

transport vehicles of persons in the first phase,

excluding private sector employees, under BH series

registration.

3. Writ petitioners/respondent No.1 in both the

appeals aggrieved by the aforesaid communication

dated 20.12.2021 issued by appellant No.2 excluding

registration of new non-transport vehicles of private

sector employees under BH series, filed the present

writ petitions.

4. Subsequent to filing of the writ petitions, by

another communication dated 11.05.2022 (as per

Annexure-R-1 to the Statement of objections filed by

the appellant No.1 -State) State Government has

directed the appellant No.2 -Commissioner to consider

registration under BH series only the motor vehicles

owned by officer/staff of All India Service, Central

Government employees and bank officers, leaving out

private sector employees.

5. Learned Single Judge by impugned common

order dated 16.12.2022 allowed the writ petitions

quashing the communication dated 20.12.2021 issued

by the appellant No.2 and further directed appellant

No.2 to register the motor vehicles of the writ

petitioners forthwith as per the notification dated

26.08.2021 under BH series and further directed the

State Government to implement the Central Motor

Vehicles (20th Amendment) Rules 2021. Being

aggrieved by the said order appellants-State

authorities are before this Court in these writ appeals.

6. Sri.S.Mahendra, learned Additional

Government Advocate reiterating the grounds urged in

the memorandum of appeals submitted that:

(i) State Government is empowered to collect

taxes from the citizens owning vehicles and that

notification dated 26.8.2021 issued by MORTH is

coming in the way of appellants exercising their powers

in collecting taxes as and when fell due;

(ii) That the levy and collection of taxes of motor

vehicles is exclusively a State subject as per Entry 57

List II (State List) of VII Schedule of Constitution of

India and that the said taxes are one of the modes of

revenue generation for the State and any short fall

would effect financial status of the State;

(iii) That MORTH has only issued a notification

and has not enacted any law in this regard to

implement the same in accordance with the Motor

Vehicles Act, the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxes Act

and Rules. As such the State is well within the

jurisdiction to exclude private employees from BH

series registration;

(iv) That the exclusion of private employees

from registering motor vehicles under BH series is

based on comparative collection of taxes payable by

the citizens for vehicles under BH series and if all

vehicles owned by employees are registered under BH

series there is every likelihood of decrease in collection

of taxes;

(v) That private employees may not be

permanent employees of the company where they are

working and they can be employees on contract basis

or can be hired for specific project or can be employees

whose services are utilized temporarily to ensure the

business continuity;

(vi) That infrastructure is yet to be developed to

collect taxes on BH series with respect to private

employees who shift from one State to another and

that all the States have not implemented BH series and

if in the event of private employees shifting from one

State to another where there is no BH series

registration they would be forced to face unnecessary

problems.

7. On the above grounds, learned Additional

Government Advocate seeks allowing of the appeals by

setting aside the impugned order.

8. Sri.J.Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for

respondent No.1 in W.A.No.191/2023 and Smt.Anisha,

learned counsel for respondent No.1 in

W.A.No.196/2023 justifying the impugned order

submit;

(i) That the communication dated 20.12.2021

issued by the appellant No.2 excluding registration of

BH series in respect of motor vehicles belonging to

private employees who were working in a company

having its location in more than four states, is arbitrary

and discriminatory.

(ii) That the appellant No.2 has no authority in

law to refuse to implement the Notification dated

26.08.2021 issued by the Central Government through

MORTH.

(iii) Similarly notification dated 30.11.2021 issued

by the Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Transport

Department is also without authority of law.

(iv) That the appellant No.2 has no power under

Section 65 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter

referred to as `MV Act') to make its own rules

inconsistent with the rules made by the Central

Government under Section 64 of the MV Act.

(v) That the very object of introduction of the

scheme is to create a seamless process of transfer of

vehicles from one State to another State facilitating

the private sector employees with transferable job as

such the impugned communication dated 20.12.2021

runs contrary to the said object.

(vi) That the appellant No.2 has already

registered motor vehicle of one private employee

namely one Mr.Vijay Kumar Jadhav who is working in

M/s.OLA company and therefore cannot deny to extend

similar benefit to the petitioners.

(vii) That in terms of Article 256 of the

Constitution of India State is under an obligation to

follow and implement the instructions/communications

issued by the Central Government.

(viii) Learned counsel for respondent No.1 in

W.A.No.191/2023 relied upon Judgments in the case of

(i) MPAIT Permit Owners Association and anr Vs State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 2004 SCC 981,

(ii) Gujarat University and anr Vs Sri.Krishna Ranganath Mudholkar reported in AIR 1963 SC 703,

(iii) State of Tamil Nadu Vs Adhiyaman Educational and Research Institute and anr reported in (1995) 4 SCC 104,

(iv) Vijay Kumar and others Vs State of Karnataka reported in AIR 1990 SC 2072.

Hence, seek for dismissal of the writ appeals.

9. Heard. Perused the records.

10. Notification dated 26.08.2021 reads that the

Government of India, MORTH in furtherance to host of

its citizen centric steps to facilitate mobility particularly

in respect of relocation of station of Government and

private sector employees and in order to facilitate

seamless transfer of vehicles introduced a new

registration mark for new vehicle i.e., "Bharath series

(BH series)". It further provides that a vehicle bearing

this registration mark shall not require assignment of a

new registration mark when the owner of the said

vehicle shifts from one State to another. This vehicle

registration facility is made available on voluntary basis

to defence personnel, employees of Central

Government/State Government/Central/State Public

Sector undertakings and Private Sector

Companies/organizations which have their offices in

four or more states/Union territories. The notification

further provides motor vehicle tax will be levied for two

years or in multiples of two. That after completion of

fourteenth year, the motor vehicle tax shall be levied

annually which shall be half of the amount which was

charged earlier for that vehicle.

11. In furtherance to the above, the Central

Government in exercise of its power conferred by

clause (a), clause (d), clause (p) of Section 64 of the

M.V. Act published Rules called "the Central Motor

Vehicles (20th Amendment) Rules 2021" amending the

Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 effective from 15th

Day of September, 2021 as under:

(i) by inserting the following clauses after clause (c)

of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 47 namely:

"(ca) working certificate in Form 60, in case the applicant working in private sector applies for BH-Series registration mark;

(cb) Official Identity Card, in case the applicant working in Government office applies for BH- series registration mark;".

(ii) by inserting a proviso after sub-rule (1) of Rule 48 as under:

"Provided that in case of application for registration of vehicles under BH Series, opted voluntarily by vehicle owner, the registration mark shall be generated randomly through the portal after verification of working certificate in Form No.60 or official identity card as the case may be by the registering authority."

(iii) by inserting following sub-rule after sub-rule (7)

of Rule 50 namely;

"(8) The registration mark for BH series vehicle generated randomly through the portal

shall be in black on white background and shall be exhibited in the following manner namely;

...........

(iv) by inserting the following Rule after Rule 51A

namely:

"51 B. Principle for motor vehicle tax.--(1) In case of fully built non-transport vehicles, the motor vehicle tax shall be calculated electronically through the portal on the basis of invoice price excluding Goods and Services Tax (GST).

(2) The Motor Vehicle Tax levied by the States or Union Territories at the time of registration in respect of BH - Series non-transport vehicles shall be the following, namely:--



Sl.    Invoice Price        Motor vehicle     Remarks
No.                         Tax (% of
                            Invoice Price)
1.     Below Rs.10 lakh     8%                2% extra
                                              charge shall
2.     Rs.10-20 lakh        10%               be levied for
                                              diesel
3.     Above Rs.20 lakh     12%               vehicles,
                                              Electric
                                              vehicles shall
                                              be charged
                                              2% less tax

(3) In case, where the vehicle bears BH -Series registration mark, the motor vehicle tax shall be levied electronically through the portal for two years, or in multiples of two, as the case may be, in the following manner, namely:-

Motor vehicle Motor Vehicles tax as per Tax for two years - Invoice price * 1.25*2 for the vehicle ________________________

registration (Rounded to next integer)

Note:- After seven days from the due date of payment of motor vehicle tax, an additional fee of one hundred rupees per day shall be levied in case of delay in payment of road tax.

"Provided that on and after fourteenth year from the date of first registration, the motor vehicle tax (rounded to next integer) shall be levied annually which will be half of the tax as mentioned in Sub-Rule(3)".

(v) By inserting following Sub-Rule after Sub-Rule

(2) of Rule 54;

"(3) This rule, shall not apply to a vehicle having BH series registration mark.

Provided that the owner of the vehicle bearing BH series registration mark shall intimate the registering authority of his place of residence in Form 33, within 30 days electronically through the portal, in case the vehicle is being kept in the State other than where the vehicle was earlier registered.

12. Thus, from the aforesaid notification effecting

necessary amendments to the Motor Vehicles Rules,

what emanates is that a special scheme has been

introduced by Central Government through MORTH

providing a voluntary option to the owners of the

motor vehicles to have their vehicles registered under

BH series subject to conditions mentioned. The rule

also provides principles for imposition of motor vehicle

tax by State and Union Territories, and the period

therefor. It also provides mechanism for verification

and incidental aspects of the matter before and after

the registration of the vehicle.

13. Section 64 of the M.V. Act provides for power

of the Central Government to make rules for the

purpose of registration of vehicles as contemplated

under Section 41 of the M.V.Act. While Section 65 of

the M.V. Act provides for power of the State

Government to make rules other than those specified

under Section 64.

14. Thus, once the rules framed in furtherance

to Section 65 of the M.V. Act by the Central

Government are made applicable, the State

Government has to implement the same in view of the

constitutional mandate provided under Article 256 of

the Constitution of India which reads as under:

"256. Obligation of the State and the Union - The executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and by any existing laws which apply in that State and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such direction to the State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose.

15. It is necessary to state at this juncture that

appellant No.2 by the impugned communication dated

20.12.2021 in furtherance to implementation of

notification dated 26.08.2021 issued by MORTH

permitting registration of vehicles in BH series, issued

instructions to all Deputy Transport Commissioners and

Senior Regional/Assistant Regional Transport Officers

of the State to take steps for registration of the

vehicles owned only by (1) officers of All India

Services, (2)Central Government Employees holding

post of inter State transfer (3) Bank officer holding

post of inter State. In the said communication the

appellant No.2 has excluded registration of motor

vehicles belonging to employees of private sector

companies/organisations.

16. The justifications that are being offered by

the appellants-State authorities for exclusion of the

motor vehicles belonging to the employees of Private

Sector Companies/organisations are;

(i) That MORTH has issued only a notification

and it has not enacted any law warranting its

implementation by the State in accordance with Motor

Vehicles Act, Rules and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles

Taxation Act, 1957. As such, State is within its

jurisdiction to exclude private employees from BH -

series registration.

(ii) that the implementation of notification would

cause loss to the State exchequer as it would effect its

power and authority to impose and collect tax on the

motor vehicles.

(iii) That the employees are either temporarily

engaged or working on part time/contract basis and it

would be difficult for the State to keep track of their

movement.

17. The above reasoning of the appellant-State

authorities cannot be countenanced firstly, as noted

above in furtherance to its object of providing

seamless process of transfer of vehicles from one State

to another State for voluntary registration under BH-

series, the Central Government has amended the

Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the same is a

legislation required to be implemented by the State

Government. Secondly, the appellant-State authorities

having already implemented the notification in respect

of categories of non-transport motor vehicles specified

thereunder except in respect of non-transport motor

vehicles belonging to employees of private Sector,

cannot contend to state that it would not implement

the notification since it is not a law enacted by

MORTH. Once the appellant-State authorities have

opted to implement the notification the same has to be

given effect in its entirety. Thirdly, amended rule

No.51B lays down principle for motor vehicle tax to be

imposed by the State and Union Territories and as

noted by learned Single Judge at paragraph 19 of the

impugned order, the concerned Minister for Road

Transport Highways of India has clarified that though

the motor vehicles would pay tax for a period of two

years or in multiples of it, at 25% higher rate, the

same is being remitted to respective State/Union

Territories online, and this has not been disputed by

the appellant-State authorities. This being the factual

position, there is no question of any loss to the State

exchequer as rightly concluded by the learned Single

Judge. Besides, its only an apprehension of the State

in not reaching its target in collecting the tax. A mere

apprehension cannot lend credible reason for not

implementing the law. Fourthly, the reasoning that

private sector employees are appointed on

temporary/contract basis and that their continuity in

service is not assured, is not acceptable inasmuch as

the same logic would also apply even for employees of

other sectors who are given benefit of the BH-series

registration. That apart, the levy of motor vehicle tax

is for two years or in multiples of two and that the

amended Motor Vehicles Rules, 2021 has also taken

care of a situation where the owner of vehicle bearing

BH series is required to intimate the registering

authority of his place of residence in Form 33 within 30

days, electronically through the portal in case the

vehicle is being kept in the State other than where the

vehicle was earlier registered.

18. As noted above one of the main grounds

urged by the appellant authorities for non inclusion of

motor vehicles belonging to employees of private

sector/organisation is that the State will suffer huge

loss in terms of motor vehicles tax to be imposed by

the State, if they are permitted to register under BH-

series. A comparative chart has been furnished by the

State to demonstrate the difference/loss of tax amount

that would be suffered by the State which is extracted

hereunder:

COMPARATIVE TABLE OF TAX RATES FOR BH SERIES AND KMVT ACT 1957

BH SERIES

Sl. Invoice Consider Motor Vehicle Tax (% of Invoice Prices ) & Tax amount (in Rs) No Price (For ing each Invoice Petrol Tax Tax for 15 Diesel Tax Tax for Elec Tax Tax for15 vehicle) price amount years amount 15 years tric amount years (Initial for (Initial for vehi (Initial for 2 Years) 2 Years) cle 2 years

1 Below Rs.10 lakh 8% 13,333/- 99,998/- 10% 16 16,666/- 1,24,995/- 6% 10,000/- 7,50,000/-

Rs.10 Lakh

2 Rs.10-20 Rs.20 lakh 10% 33,333/- 2,49,998/- 12% 40 40,000/- 3,00,000/- 8% 26,666/- 1,99,995/-

lakh

3. Above Rs.30 lakh 12% 60,000/- 4,50,000/- 14% 70,000/- 5,25,000/- 10% 50,000/- 3,75,000/-

Rs.20 lakh

KMVT ACT 1957

Sl. Invoice Price (For Tax under KMVT Act 1957 Electric Vehicle No each vehicle)

Considering Life time Tax for Petrol & Proposed Difference As per State Government Invoice price Diesel Tax for 15 years /Loss of notification vide SARIE 76 Vehicles (As per BH Series) Tax SAEPA 2016, Dated:31.03.2016 Amount the tax payable for the electric vehicles are exempted in the state of Karnataka from dated:

1 Below Rs.10 lakh 14% 1,40,000/- 99,998/- 40,002/- 01.04.2016 on words.

Rs.10 Lakh

2 Rs.10-20 lakh Rs.20 lakh 17% 3,40,000/- 2,49,998/- 90,002/-

3. Above Rs.30 lakh 18% 5,40,000/- 4,50,000/- 90,000/-

Rs.20 lakh

Sl. Invoice Tax under KMVT Act 1957 Proposed Difference / Difference/ No Price (For Tax for 15 Loss of Tax Loss of Tax each Consider Life time Tax for years Amount (For Amount (For vehicle) ing Petrol & Diesel (As per BH Each Vehicle) 1000 Vehicles) Invoice Vehicles (Rs.) Series) (Rs.) (Rs.) price (Rs.)

1. Below Rs.10 lakh 14% 1,40,000/- 99,998/- 40,002/- 4,00,00,000 Rs.10 Lakh

2. Rs.10-20 Rs.20 lakh 17% 3,40,000/- 2,49,998/- 90,002/- 9,00,00,000 lakh

3. Above Rs.30 lakh 18% 5,40,000/- 4,50,000/- 90,000/- 9,00,00,000 Rs.20 lakh

TOTAL 22,00,00,000

Note: Life of Motor Vehicle is taken as 15 years.

If 1000 Motor Vehicles registered in a year in each price category.

19. Relying upon the aforesaid chart it is

vehemently contended by learned Additional

Government Advocate for the appellant authorities that

the notification dated 26.08.2021 amending the Motor

Vehicles Rules to the extent levying tax is coming in

the way of State collecting the tax. It is necessary at

this juncture to note that though it is contended that in

view of Entry 57 of List II (State list) of Schedule VII to

the Constitution of India State has exclusive

jurisdiction to impose tax on vehicles and that by

amending the Motor Vehicles Rules MORTH has

interfered with the power and authority of the State,

the said contention in our considered view is

misconceived and cannot be countenanced. It is

relevant at this juncture to refer Entry No.57 in List II

and entry 35 in List III of schedule VII of the

Constitution of India, which reads as under:

"Entry 57 List II. Taxes on vehicles, whether mechanically propelled or not, suitable for use on roads, including tramcars subject to the provisions of entry 35 of List III."

"Entry 35 List III. Mechanically propelled vehicles including the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied."

20. The Apex Court in the case of BOLANI

ORES LIMITED VS. STATE OF ORISSA reported in

(1974) 2 SCC 777 dealing with construction of Entry

57 of List II and Entry 35 of List III of Schedule VII of

the Constitution of India has held as under;

"15......It will thus be seen that while Entry 57 of List II is solely concerned with taxes on vehicles whether mechanically propelled or not, Entry 35 deals with also the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied. Taxes on vehicles connote the liability to pay taxes at the rates at which the taxes are to be levied. On the other hand, the expression 'principles of taxation' denote rules of

guidance in the matter of taxation. The ambit and amplitude of these two legislative entries in the respective Lists was dealt with in State of Assam & Others speaking for the. Constitution Bench of this Court observed at p. 614.

"The two entries deal with two different matters though allied ones-one deals with taxes on vehicles and the other with the principles on which such taxes are to be levied. when two entries in the Constitution, whether in the same List or different Lists, deal with two subjects, if possible, an attempt shall be made to harmonize them rather than to bring them into conflict. Taxes on vehicles in their ordinary meaning connote the liability to pay taxes at the rates at which the taxes are to be levied. On the other hand, the expression "principles of taxation" denotes rules of guidance in the matter of taxation. We, therefore, hold that the Amending Acts do not come into conflict with the existing law in respect of any principles of taxation, but only deal with a subject matter which is exclusively within the legislative competence of the State Legislature."

21. A question had arose before learned

Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.28063/2015

connected with other writ petitions concerning

challenge to the constitutionality of Karnataka Motor

Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Act, 2014 by which

State Government had sought to insert an explanation

to Section 3 of the said Act, which reads as under;

"Explanation 2.- In respect of motor vehicles registered outside the State of Karnataka and which are in the State for a period exceeding thirty days, notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (Central Act 59 of 1988), and in any order or direction contained in any judgment or order of any Court, tax shall be levied as specified in Parts A1, A2, A4, A5, A6, A7 and A8 as the case may be."

22. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex

Court in the case of BOLANI ORES LIMITED (supra)

learned Single Judge has held that registration of

motor vehicle is entirely governed by Chapter IV of the

MV Act. No motor vehicle can be brought on road

without registration. A tax shall be levied on all motor

vehicles suitable for use on the roads by virtue of

exclusive power conferred on the State Government.

Therefore, the moment a vehicle is registered under

the MV Act, the liability to pay tax arises. The principle

even in the present case, for taxation by the State

Government, is the requirement for registration under

the Central Act.

23. Thus, even in the instant case, in view of

the notification issued by the MORTH providing for

registration of motor vehicles under BH series and

framing /amending corresponding rules under Central

Motor Vehicles Act (20th Amendment) Rules, 2021

which also provide for principle for motor vehicle tax,

as noted above, it is not available for the State