Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the levy of motor vehicle tax in terms of Ext.P2 for a period from 01/04/2009 to 30/06/2013. In fact, the petitioner’s vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-46-8765 has been seized by the Sub Inspector of Police while being involved in transportation of river sand without proper permission and the same was detained for violation of the provisions of Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The seizure was effected on 08/05/2009. The demand is made by the Motor Vehicles Department calling upon the petitioner to pay tax for the aforesaid period when apparently the vehicle was not being operated and was under detention orders by the District Collector. Though interim orders were issued by this Court directing the petitioner to get release of the vehicle, the petitioner could not raise the necessary amount to be deposited and accordingly the petitioner’s vehicle still remains in the custody of the department. Under these circumstances, demand for payment of motor vehicle tax is bad in law, is the submission of the petitioner.
2. Apparently, Ext.P2 indicates that the amount involved is Rs.35,640/-. The petitioner submitted Ext.P3 before the 3rd respondent seeking for waiver of the said amount and the same has not been considered.
3. Having regard to the aforesaid factual situation, it is clear that the petitioner was not operating the vehicle during the relevant time. Though he was under obligation to inform the 3rd respondent about the aforesaid seizure and non-operation of the vehicle and to request for waiver of the liability to pay motor vehicle tax, nothing has been done by the petitioner. However, having regard to the factual situation involved in the matter, it is clear that the petitioner could not operate his vehicle atleast from 08/05/2009 and therefore he is not liable to pay motor vehicle tax as demanded. Since his vehicle was seized only on 08/05/2009, motor vehicle tax applicable with reference to the period from 01/04/2009 to the date of seizure or for the period of quarterly payment has to be paid by the petitioner.
Under these circumstances, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to reconsider the demand made in terms of Ext.P2 and issue necessary orders waiving the liability of the petitioner to pay motor vehicle tax for the period under which his vehicle was under seizure by the 1st respondent. This may be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr