Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 277 Tel
Judgement Date : 20 January, 2023
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.68 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. M.Krishna Reddy, learned Government
Pleader for Transport for the appellants.
2. State of Telangana and Secretary of Regional
Transport Authority, Ranga Reddy District, are the
appellants in this writ appeal.
3. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated
15.06.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing
W.P.No.7806 of 2021 filed by the respondent as the writ
petitioner.
4. Respondent had filed the related writ petition seeking
a direction to the appellants who were arrayed as
respondents therein for refund of Rs.6,02,390.00
appropriated by the appellants for issuing No Objection
Certificate (NOC) for sale of vehicles.
5. Learned Single Judge noted that because of COVID-
19 pandemic and the resultant national lockdown in the
months of March, April and May, 2020, respondent could
not ply its vehicles and consequently could not pay the
taxes for the quarter ending June, 2020. In order to
reduce the loss, respondent sold the vehicles owned by it
and requested appellant No.2 to issue NOC. On the
ground that respondent had not paid the taxes for the
quarters April to June, 2020 and July to September, 2020,
appellant No.2 raised a demand of Rs.6,02,390.00 for
issuing NOC. This was paid by the respondent under
protest, whereafter the related writ petition came to be
filed.
6. Adverting to proceedings in W.P.No.21463 of 2021,
learned Single Judge noted that State Government had
already issued G.O.Ms.No.64, dated 31.12.2020,
exempting payment of advance tax for the quarters ending
30.06.2020 and 30.09.2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic
and the national lockdown. Government had assured that
taxes already paid would be adjusted for the subsequent
quarter.
7. Appellants had filed counter affidavit opposing the
writ petition. It was contended that though the
Government of Telangana had granted exemption from
payment of tax for the quarters ending 30.06.2020 and
30.09.2020 vide G.O.Ms.No.64, dated 31.12.2020, as on
the date of making of the request for NOC, the said
exemption was not granted. That apart, respondent had
also not paid taxes. Therefore, appellant No.2 had rightly
directed the respondent to make the payment of taxes due
for issuance of NOC.
8. Relying upon an earlier decision of this Court dated
15.06.2022 in W.P.No.21463 of 2021 and considering the
fact that Government had already granted exemption from
payment of taxes for the quarters ending 30.06.2020 and
30.09.2020, learned Single Judge directed the appellants
to refund the sum of Rs.6,02,390.00 with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum. Learned Single Judge held as
follows:
5. However, after hearing both the parties and in view of the directions of this Court in W.P.Nos.21463 of 2021 and other by order even dated, 15.06.2022 and also in view of the fact that the Government has also granted exception from the payment of taxes for the quarters ending on 30th June, 2020 and 30th September, 2020 and has also assured that the taxes paid, if any, shall be adjusted for the future quarters, this Court is of the opinion that there is no liability on the petitioner to pay the taxes for the said periods and in view thereof, and in consequence thereof, the respondents are required to refund the sum of Rs.6,02,390/- paid by the petitioner.
6. The respondents are therefore directed to refund the amounts to the petitioner with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of payment by the petitioner till the date of refund by the respondents.
9. We find no error or infirmity in the view taken by the
learned Single Judge.
10. When the State Government had issued
G.O.Ms.No.64, dated 31.12.2020, waiving of payment of
taxes for the quarters ending 30.06.2020 and 30.09.2020,
to contend that since the request for NOC was prior to
31.12.2020 and therefore respondent should have paid the
taxes, in our view, is totally an untenable and irrational
contention. Such a contention was rightly negatived by the
learned Single Judge.
11. In the circumstances, we find no good reason to
entertain the writ appeal.
12. Writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
______________________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 20.01.2023 vs
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!