9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceived a communication dated 22.06.2020, from the Transport Department directing it to deposit differential amount of token tax of the vehicles sold after issuance of SRO 492 dated 01.08.2019. It was the difference of tax on the amount of GST levied on sale of vehicle, on which the token tax was not charged earlier. It was with reference to the clarification issued by the Transport Department on 26.11.2019, which provided that the token tax/ road tax is to be levied on the aggregate cost of the vehicle which includes basic cost plus GST - It could not be disputed that the liability to pay the aforesaid tax is on the buyer of the vehicle who has to utilize the same on the public roads. The fault cannot be attributed to the petitioner for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dai Motors Private Limited. In the regular course of business it is selling the Automobile Products manufactured by Hyundai Motors Private Limited. 3. The petitioner charges the cost value of the vehicle and the taxes levied thereon. Registration of vehicles is the responsibility of the buyer and so the payment of tax. Vide SRO 492 dated 01.08.2019, issued by the Transport Department in exercise of powers conferred under section 3 of the J K Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 (for short 'the 1957 Act'), registration fee on the vehicles was increased. As against the earlier system of payment of registration fee on annual basis, one time ad-valorem tax was levied. Prior to that, vide communication dated 12.10.2017, issued by the Tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jammu, directing the petitioner to deposit the differential tax for the period from 01.08.2019 to 25.11.2019. It was difference of registration fees on the amount of GST, which earlier was not included in the cost price of the vehicle for the purpose of calculation of tken tax. 4. In the aforesaid factual matrix, the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that vide impugned clarification dated 26.11.2019, new words have been added in SRO 492 dated 01.08.2019, for which there was no jurisdiction vested with the authority issuing the clarification. He further submitted that in effect the clarification issued by the department has put liability on the petitioner with retrospective effect even though, the basic liability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The cost of the vehicle will always include the actual cost to the buyer. It was the responsibility of the petitioner to have calculated proper tax. As it has violated the mandate of SRO 492, it is liable to pay the differential tax. Vide clarification nothing new has been added. It is simple clarification, which will relate back to the date of basic notification. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. 8. For the sake of reference, the relevant provision of Section 4 of the J K Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 is reproduced as hereunder : 4. Payment of tax and issue of token. - (1) (a) The tax levied in pursuance of a notification issued under sub-section (1) of section 3 shall b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e shall be generated by the dealers on Vahaan Portal. All fees and taxes are to be deposited by the buyer of the vehicle with the dealer who in turn will make online payment on the Vahaan Portal. No more temporary registration numbers were to be issued. In view of the change in the scheme for calculation of token tax for registration of vehicles in Jammu and Kashmir and with the introduction of new rates of tax vide SRO 492 dated 01.08.2019, the petitioner started collecting the amount of tax on the cost of vehicle from the buyers thereof and make online deposit on the Vahaan Portal. The amount of ad-valorem tax was being calculated on the cost of vehicle excluding the GST charged thereon. 11. The registration of the vehicle or payment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nline. The petitioners were not to be benefitted by saving this tax. Clarification was issued only when some transporters sought to raise issue with the Transport Department. On examination thereof, the department issued the clarification on 26.11.2019. It is not in dispute that after the issuance of the aforesaid clarification the token tax is being calculated on the value of the vehicle including the amount of GST. Any clarification issued by the department to a notification cannot have retrospective effect. 12. For the reasons mentioned above, we find merit in the present petitions. The same are allowed. The impugned notices directing the petitioner to deposit the differential amount of tax for the period from 03.08.2019 to 26.11.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
