Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 585 of 1979.
Petitioner: Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd.
Respondent: The State of Bihar & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 585 of 1979.
Judges: SABYASACHI MUKHARJI & S. RANGANATHAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 10, 1988
Head Note:
BIHAR AND ORISSA MOTOR VEHICLES TAXATION ACT, 1930:
Sections 6 and 8 – Amendments introduced by Ordinance No.84 of 1976 – Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Revcovery Act, section 9 – Whether tax could be levied on vehicles not under use? – The High Court held sections 6 and 8 intra vires and consistent with the views of the Court in 1975(2) SCR 138 – The Certificate Officer to examine the liability of the appellant – Appellant entitled to raise all legitimate legal objections before the certificate Officer – Decision of the High Court upheld.
Cases Reffered:
Bolani Ores Ltd. etc. v. State of Orissa, 1975 (2) SCR 138.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. This appeal raises the question of taxability on dumpers and tippers owned by the appellant company under the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930, as amended by Ordinance No. 84 of 1976. The contention on behalf of the petitioner who is appellant before us that unless vehicles which were used, the tax could not be levied. This contention was urged before the High Court and has been considered by the High Court in the judgment under appeal. In the meantime, there were some amendments introduced in the Act by the Ordinance No. 84 of 1976. Reading the Act in the light of the Ordinance, the High Court took the view that the sections 6 and 8 of the Act and the Ordinance are intra vires and also consistent with the views expressed by this Court in the case of BOLANI ORES LTD. ETC. V. STATE OF ORISSA 1975 (2) SCR 138. The High Court came to the conclusion that the sections 6 and 8 of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, even after the amendment, need not be declared ultra vires and they should be given a limited meaning in the light of aforesaid observations of the High Court. The Certificate Officer was directed by the High Court to examine the liability of the appellant company to pay tax in the light of the observations and after examining the objections already raised or to be raised under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act and dispose of the certificate cases in accordance with law.
2. In that view of the matter we find no ground to interfere with the Order of the High Court. The High Court has proceeded on the well-settled principles of law. We further clarify that it will be open to the appellant to raise all legitimate legal objections before the Certificate Officer. In the interest of justice, it is also necessary to clarify that the Certificate should not be given effect until such objections are disposed of by him in accordance with law. This, however, will not prejudice the rights, if any, of the appellant to prefer any appeal from the Order passed by the Certificate Officer in accordance with law.
3. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. There will be no Order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
1. This appeal raises the question of taxability on dumpers and tippers owned by the appellant company under the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930, as amended by Ordinance No. 84 of 1976. The contention on behalf of the petitioner who is appellant before us that unless vehicles which were used, the tax could not be levied. This contention was urged before the High Court and has been considered by the High Court in the judgment under appeal. In the meantime, there were some amendments introduced in the Act by the Ordinance No. 84 of 1976. Reading the Act in the light of the Ordinance, the High Court took the view that the sections 6 and 8 of the Act and the Ordinance are intra vires and also consistent with the views expressed by this Court in the case of BOLANI ORES LTD. ETC. V. STATE OF ORISSA 1975 (2) SCR 138. The High Court came to the conclusion that the sections 6 and 8 of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, even after the amendment, need not be declared ultra vires and they should be given a limited meaning in the light of aforesaid observations of the High Court. The Certificate Officer was directed by the High Court to examine the liability of the appellant company to pay tax in the light of the observations and after examining the objections already raised or to be raised under Section 9 of the Bihar & Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act and dispose of the certificate cases in accordance with law.
2. In that view of the matter we find no ground to interfere with the Order of the High Court. The High Court has proceeded on the well-settled principles of law. We further clarify that it will be open to the appellant to raise all legitimate legal objections before the Certificate Officer. In the interest of justice, it is also necessary to clarify that the Certificate should not be given effect until such objections are disposed of by him in accordance with law. This, however, will not prejudice the rights, if any, of the appellant to prefer any appeal from the Order passed by the Certificate Officer in accordance with law.
3. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. There will be no Order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
