Madras High Court

Apa Hotels Pvt Ltd vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 July, 2021

                                                                      WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 27-07-2021

                                                       CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                            WP Nos. 1567 to 1572 of 2013

                     APA HOTELS PVT LTD.,
                     Represented by its
                     Group Finance Controller,
                     Mr.S.Prabakaran,
                     115, Thyagarayar Road,
                     T.Nagar,
                     Chennai-600 017.                  ..         Petitioner in all WPs
                                                            vs.
                     1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
                       Represented by its Secretary,
                       Home (Transport) Department,
                       Fort St. George,
                       Chennai-600 009.

                     2.The Assistant Commissioner (CT),
                       T.Nagar – South Assessment Circle,
                       Chennai-17.

                     3.The Regional Transport Officer,
                       K.K.Nagar West,
                       Chennai-600 078.

                     4.The Motor Vehicle Inspector,
                       K.K.Nagar West,
                       Chennai-600 078.                      ..        Respondents

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

WP 1567 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax on the petitioner's new Toyota Innova 2.5 G(E4) Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJ11JV4007381980 0113 and Engine No.2KD U204424, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

WP 1568 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax on the petitioner's new Toyota Etios VD Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJB49BT200047466 0113 and Engine No.1ND 1302416, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

WP 1569 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax on the petitioner's new Toyota Innova 2.5 G (E4) Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJ11JV4007381987 0113 and Engine No.2KD U204484, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

WP 1570 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

on the petitioner's new Toyota Innova 2.5 G (E4) Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJ11JV4007381944 0113 and Engine No.2KD U204293, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

WP 1571 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax on the petitioner's new Toyota Innova 2.5 G (E4) Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJ11JV4007381963 0113 and Engine No.2KD U203954, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

WP 1572 of 2013 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax on the petitioner's new Toyota Etios VD Motor Vehicle bearing Chassis No.MBJB49BTX00047490 0113 and Engine No.1ND 1302506, to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth respondents.

For Petitioner in all WPs : Mr.B.Satish Sundar for Mr.R.Srinivasalu.

For Respondents in all WPs : Mr.V.Veluchamy, Government Advocate.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

COMMON ORDER

The relief sought for in these writ petitions to forbear the

respondents and their subordinates from demanding or collecting entry tax

on the petitioner's new Toyota Innova 2.5 G (E4) and Toyota Etios VD

Motor Vehicles bearing Chassis Nos. MBJ11JV4007381980 0113,

MBJB49BT200047466 0113, MBJ11JV4007381987 0113,

MBJ11JV4007381944 0113, MBJ11JV4007381963 0113 and

MBJB49BTX00047490 0113 and Engine Nos. 2KD U204424, 1ND

1302416, 2KD U204484, 2KD U204293, 2KD U203954 and 1ND 1302506

to be registered and assign new registration mark by the third and fourth

respondents.

2. In respect of the relief sought for by the petitioner regarding

the entry tax, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of

V.Krishnamurthy vs. Secretary to Government [2019 (4) CTC 20], and

the said order of the Hon'ble Division Bench was passed based on the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of

Kerala and Others vs. Fr. William Fernandez and Others [(2017) 12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

Scale 463].

3. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of

V.Krishnamurthy vs. Secretary to Government [2019 (4) CTC 20] in

paragraphs 75 and 76 observed as under:-

“75. At the first instance, we need to point out that no Court can compel the Government to exercise its power to examine or for that matter to grant administrative waiver. It is a policy decision to be taken by the Government and it is not for the Court to dictate as to whether or not the Government should exercise such power. That apart, facts of the case in which Government granted administrative waiver subject to conditions vide G.O.Ms.No.157 dated 22.04.1996 was entirely different and cannot be applied to the present cases, which arise out of a different enactment, the purport and intent being totally different. First of the decision was in the year 1999 holding that entry tax is leviable on import of vehicles. Another learned single Bench took a different view but did not distinguish the earlier decision, but chose to follow the decision of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in Fr.William Fernandez. In the third decision, there

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

has been a reference because in the third decision, the first decision was noted. However, we need not labour much to make a further probe on this issue because the decision of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in Fr.William Fernandez has been reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the matters have attained finality. It is not in dispute that the petitioner in W.P.No.33525 of 2007 is still in possession and ownership of the vehicle imported by them. The law on the subject as decided by this Court as early as 01.09.1999 holds that the entry tax is leviable on imported vehicles. Therefore, we do not find any merits in the submissions that the matter should be relegated to the Government for grant of administrative waiver.

76. For all the above reasons, the writ petitions are dismissed and it is held that the petitioners are liable to pay entry tax on imported vehicles brought into the State of Tamil Nadu for use or for sale. Insofar as the miscellaneous petitions filed by the petitioners raising additional grounds are concerned, the learned Senior Counsel has not advanced any arguments, but their argument was only on the ground of administrative waiver in the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ WP Nos.1567 to 1572 of 2013

light of the decision taken by us in the preceding paragraphs. Hence, there is no necessity to consider the additional grounds raised in the miscellaneous petitions. Accordingly, the same stands closed. No costs.”

4. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India

in the case of State of Kerala and Others vs. Fr. William Fernandez and

Others [(2017) 12 Scale 463] and the judgment of the Hon'ble Division

Bench of this Court in the case of V.Krishnamurthy vs. Secretary to

Government [2019 (4) CTC 20], the relief, as such, sought for in these writ

petitions deserves no merit consideration and accordingly, the writ petitions

stand dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. The writ

petitioner is bound to pay the entry tax as demanded by the respondents,

within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order.

27-07-2021 Index : Yes/No.

Internet : Yes/No.