9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffence. For the abovesaid reason, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Held that - It is well settled that the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990, is not applicable to the excavator and therefore, the Entry Tax for excavator has not been paid. The contention of the petitioner that he had already paid Central Sales Tax at the time of purchase of the excavator from Dharwad, has not been disputed by the respondent by filing any counter affidavit. As levy of Entry Tax is not applicable to the excavator, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside on the ground of jurisdiction and accordingly, set aside. The writ petition is allowed. - W.P(MD)No.2833 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.(MD)No.3100 of 2006 - - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990, payable for the excavator was unpaid by the petitioner. 3. According to the petitioner, the consignment was taken to the consignee's place with valid documents disclosing all the particulars as required under Section 44 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act (Hereinafter referred to as TNGST Act ). He also submitted that the first respondent has no power to detain a vehicle for non-payment of Entry Tax. The petitioner has contended that in response to the impugned notice, dated 20.03.2006, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of ₹ 5,36,250/- under Section 42(3)(b) of the TNGST Act, a reply, dated 20.03.2006, was submitted to the Deputy Commercial T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ales Tax. He submitted that when the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Areas Act, 1990 is not applicable to excavator, the impugned notice is ex facie illegal. He relied on the decisions stated supra. 5.Record of proceeding shows that this Court, vide order dated 04.04.2006, in W.P.M.P.No.3100 of 2006, filed for the release of the vehicle, has passed the following interim order; Interim direction as prayed for, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle without prior permission from the respondent 6. Though the writ petition is pending for nearly six years, no counter affidavit is filed. However, taking this Court to the statutory provision of Section 44 of the TNGST Act, lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... far as they are applicable to the case, namely:- 1.A bill of sale or a delivery note in the form prescribed (form XX or form XX-A) and a goods vehicle record or trip sheet or log book. 2.A certificate from the Village Administrative Officer when the goods under transport are claimed to be agricultural produce other than sugarcane grown in his own land or on a land in which he has interest or declaration in Form XX-B signed by the agriculturist and by the registered dealer to whom the agricultural produce is transported. 2-A. A certificate from the Cane Inspector Assistant Director of Agriculture when the goods under transport are claimed to be sugarcane grown in his own land or on a land in which he has interest or declaration in F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s vehicle: 44. The owner or other person in charge of a goods vehicle shall carry with him- (i) Bill of sale or delivery note or such other documents as may be prescribed; and (ii) Goods vehicle Record or Trip Sheet, relating to the goods under transport and containing such particulars as may be prescribed and shall submit to such officer as may be prescribed, the documents aforesaid or copies thereof within such time as may be prescribed. Section 45(4)(a): Offences and Penalties: 45....(1)...(4)(a)Any owner or other person in charge of a boat or goods vehicle who fails to carry with him any of the records or documents specified in Section 43 or Section 44, as the case may be, shall on conviction, be liable to sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icles into Local Areas Act, 1990, is not applicable to the excavator and therefore, the Entry Tax for excavator has not been paid. The contention of the petitioner that he had already paid Central Sales Tax at the time of purchase of the excavator from Dharwad, has not been disputed by the respondent by filing any counter affidavit. The applicability of the decisions reported in TNCTJ Vol (9) 2003-2004 (P.R.P. Granities Vs. The Check Post Officer/Asst. Commercial Tax officer, Chennai) and 2005 Vol. 142 STC 323 (Ray Constructions Ltd., Vs. Intelligence Officer, Kozhikode and others) to the case of the excavator are also not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent. Reading of the notice, dated 20.03.2006, makes it clear that the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
