# Raj Kishor Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2020) 9 ILRA 349
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2020-07-07
- **Case number:** Writ Tax No. 365 of 2020
- **Bench:** Pankaj Mithal, Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivsatava
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/raj-kishor-singh-v-state-of-u-p-ors-45952
- **Pages:** 10

## Headnote

A. U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997-
Sections 4, 9, , 12, 20 - Tax - Liability for
payment of tax - the Act levies compulsory
payment of tax on every registered
vehicle. The plea that the vehicle was in
repair/maintenance cannot be a ground to
evade the liability for payment of tax by
the owner of the motor vehicle whose
name is entered in the certificate of
registration
in
the
absence
of
the
certificate having been surrendered as per
the statutory provisions. (Para 17)
Writ Petition Rejected. (E-10)

List of cases cited: -

## Text

9 All. Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
349

34. प्रस्तुत वाद के तथ्योीं पर बबना बकस
गुण-दोष एवीं मत को प्रकि बकए हुए एवीं इस
तथ्य का सींज्ञान लेते हुए बक अप लाथी कम्पन
द्वारा स्वयीं में वषथ 2013-14 में लगभग 65 करोड़
रु० कर जमा बकया गया है, इस प्रकार वषथ
2014-15 में भ अप लाथी कम्पन द्वारा स्वींय
लगभग 54 करोड़ रू० कर क धनराबश जमा
क गई है एवीं यह बक व्यापार एक रबजस्टडथ
प्रबतबष्ठत
कम्पन
है
अतएव
उपरोक्त
पररस्स्थबतयोीं को दृबष्टगत रखते हुए अप लाथी को
यह बनदेबशत बकया जाता है बक वह वषथ 201314 (प्रान्त य) में कुल रु० 2 करोड़ वषथ 2013-14
केन्द्र य में कुल रु० 10 लाख एवीं वषथ 2014-15
प्रान्त य में कुल रु० 2 करोड़ एक माह के अिर
जमा करें। यबद अप लाथी उपरोक्त बनदेबशत
धनराबश उसे प्रदान बकये गए समय के अन्तगथत
जमा करेगा तब उस पररस्स्थबत में अप लाथी के
द्वारा दास्खल प्रथम अप लोीं का बनस्तारण प्रथम
अप ल य अबधकार द्वारा त न माह के अिर
गुण-दोष के आधार पर बकया जावेगा।

35. उपरोक्त बनदेशोीं के साथ प्रस्तुत त नोीं
पुनरबनर क्षण
याबचकाएाँ
अस्न्तम
रूप
से
बनस्ताररत क जात है।
----------
(2020)09ILR A349
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 07.07.2020

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PANKAJ MITHAL, J.
THE HON'BLE DR. YOGENDRA KUMAR
SRIVSATAVA, J.

Writ Tax No. 365 of 2020

Raj Kishor Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Manish Dwivedi

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

A. U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997-
Sections 4, 9, , 12, 20 - Tax - Liability for
payment of tax - the Act levies compulsory
payment of tax on every registered
vehicle. The plea that the vehicle was in
repair/maintenance cannot be a ground to
evade the liability for payment of tax by
the owner of the motor vehicle whose
name is entered in the certificate of
registration
in
the
absence
of
the
certificate having been surrendered as per
the statutory provisions. (Para 17)
Writ Petition Rejected. (E-10)

List of cases cited: -

1. St. of Orissa & ors Vs Bijaya C. Tripathy
(2004) 7 SCC 139

2. St. of Karn. Vs K.Gopalakrishna Shenoy & ors.
(1987) 3 SCC 655

(Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra
Kumar Srivastava, J.)

1. The present petition seeks to raise a
challenge to recovery proceedings initiated
pursuant to a recovery certificate dated
15.09.2019 issued by the respondent no. 3
exercising powers under Section 20 of the
Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation
Act, 19971. The petitioner also seeks to
challenge the subsequent recovery citation
dated 10.10.2019 for recovery of Rs.
1,10,880/-.

2. As per the facts pleaded in the writ
petition, the petitioner is the owner of a
commercial vehicle having a registration
no. UP90.T.1382. It is sought to be
contended that the motor vehicle in
question had been handed over to the dealer
350 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
from whom it has been purchased for the
purpose of maintenance on account of
certain defects and for the said reason the
petitioner was not liable for payment of tax
which is sought to be recovered from him

3.

Learned
Standing
Counsel
appearing for the State respondents has
submitted that the petitioner being the
registered owner of the motor vehicle, the
liability in respect of the payment of tax
under the provisions of the Act, 1997
would be of the petitioner. It is further
submitted that there is no material to
suggest that the petitioner had applied for
surrender of the vehicle at any stage and
therefore he cannot escape the liability of
tax.

4. The question which thus falls for
consideration before us is as to whether the
owner of a motor vehicle can escape the
liability for payment of tax under Section 4
of the Act, 1997 by raising a plea that the
vehicle was not put to use on the road, even
though
the
certificate
of
registration
continued to be in his name and had not
been surrendered.

5. The provisions with regard to
imposition of tax in the State of Uttar
Pradesh on motor vehicles are governed in
terms of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles
Taxation Act, 1997 [U.P. Act No. 21 of
1997]. The definition of the term 'owner' in
respect of a motor vehicle has been defined
under Section 2 (h) of the Act, 1997 and for
ease of reference, the said provision is
being extracted below :-

"2 (h) 'Owner' in respect of a motor
vehicle means the person whose name is
entered in the certificate of registration
issued in respect of such vehicle, and where
such vehicle is the subject of an agreement
of hire-purchase or lease or hypothecation,
the person in possession of the vehicle
under that agreement and where any such
person is a minor, the guardian of such
minor."

6. Section 4 of the Act, 1997 which
provides for imposition of tax reads as
follows :-

"4. Imposition of tax - (1) Save
as otherwise provided in this Act or the
rules made thereunder, no motor vehicle
other than a transport vehicle, shall be used
in any public place in Uttar Pradesh unless
a one-time tax at the rate applicable in
respect of such motor vehicle, has been
paid in respect thereof.

Provided that in respect of an old
motor vehicle instead of a one time tax,
annual tax applicable to such motor vehicle
as
may
be
specified
by
the
State
Government by notification in the Gazette
may be paid.

[(1-A)
Save
as
otherwise
provided in this Act or the rules made
thereunder no three wheeler motor cab and
goods carriage having gross vehicle weight
not exceeding 3000 kilograms, shall be
used in any public' place in Uttar Pradesh
unless yearly tax at such rate of such motor
vehicle, as may be specified by the State
Government by notification in the Gazette,
has been paid in respect thereof:

Provided that in respect of a
motor vehicle under this sub-section in lieu
of yearly tax such amount of one time tax
may be payable as specified by the State
Government by notification in the Gazette.

Provided also that from the date
of commencement of the Uttar Pradesh
Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment)
Act, 2014 no motor vehicle other than a
transport vehicle shall be used in any public
place after the expiry of validity of
9 All. Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
351
registration under the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 unless a green tax at the rate
applicable to such Motor Vehicles as may
be specified by notification, by the State
Government has been paid in respect
thereof.

(2) Save as otherwise provided by
or under this Act no goods carriage other
than those specified in sub-section (1A),construction
equipment
vehicles,
specially
designed
vehicles,motor
cab
(other than three wheeler motor cab), maxi
cab and public service vehicles owned or
controlled
by
the
State
Transport
Undertaking, shall be used in any public
place in Uttar Pradesh unless a quarterly
tax at the rate applicable to such motor
vehicle as may be specified by the State
Government by notification in the Gazette,
has been paid in respect thereof.

Provided that in respect a motor
vehicle under this sub-section instead of
quarterly tax, an yearly tax at such rate as
may be specified by the State Government
may be payable.

(2-A) Save as otherwise provided
by or under this Act no public service
vehicle other than those referred in subsection (1-A) and sub-section (2) shall be
used in any public place in Uttar Pradesh
unless a monthly tax at such rate as may be
notified by the State Government is paid in
respect thereof:

Provided that in respect a motor
vehicle under this sub-section instead of
monthly tax, a quarterly or an yearly tax at
such rate as may be notified by the State
Government may be payable.

(2-B)
Where
any
reciprocal
agreement relating to taxation of goods
carried by road is entered into between the
Government of Uttar Pradesh and any other
State government or a Union Territory, the
levy of tax under sub-section (1-A) or subsection (2) shall, notwithstanding anything
contained in the said sub-section, be in
accordance with the terms and conditions
of such agreement:

Provided that the tax so levied
shall not exceed the tax which would
otherwise been levied under the Act.

(3) Where any motor vehicle
other than a transport vehicle is found
plying as a transport vehicle, such tax
therefore as may be notified by the State
Government, shall be payable.

(4) The State Government may,
by notification, increase by not more than
fifty percent, the rates of tax, specified in
Part 'B', Part 'C' or Part 'D' of the First
Schedule.

7. In terms of Section 9, a time frame
is provided for payment of tax and it is also
provided that in case of non-payment
within the stipulated period, a penalty shall
be payable. Section 9 of the Act, 1997
reads as follows :-

"9. Payment of tax and penalty
- (1) Subject to the provisions of Section
11,-

(i) the tax payable under subsection (1) of Section 4 shall be paid at the
time of the registration of the vehicle under
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 :

Provided that in respect of an old
motor vehicle, the tax shall be payable in
advance on or before the fifteenth day of
January in each year;

(ii) the tax payable under subsection (1-A) of Section 4, shall be payable
in advance for one year at the time of the
registration of the vehicle under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 and thereafter on or
before the fifteenth day of the first calendar
month of the each year next following.

(iii) the tax payable under subsection (2) of Section 4 shall be payable in
advance for one quarter at the time of
352 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
registration of the vehicle under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 and thereafter on or
before the fifteenth day of the first calendar
month of the each quarter next following.

(iv) (a) the tax payable under subsection (2-A) of Section 4 shall be payable
in advance for one calendar month at the
time of registration of the vehicle under the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and thereafter on
or before the fifteenth day of each calendar
month next following.

(b) in respect of vehicles covered
by temporary permit issued for the
conveyance of passengers on special
occasions, such as to and from fairs and
religious gatherings or to carry marriage
parties, tourist parties or such other
reserved parties shall be paid at the time of
issuance of such temporary permit.

(2) When any person transfers a
motor vehicle registered in his name to any
other person, then without prejudice to the
liability of the transfer or in this regard, the
transferee shall be liable to pay the arrears
of tax, additional tax and penalty, if any, in
respect of the motor vehicle so transferred,
due on or before the date of its transfer, as
if the transferee was the owner of the said
motor vehicle during the period for which
such tax, additional tax or penalty is due.

(3) Where the tax or additional
tax I respect of a motor vehicle is not paid
within the period specified in sub-section
(1), in addition to the tax or the additional
tax due, a penalty at such rate, as may be
prescribed, shall be payable, for which the
owner and the operator if any shall be
jointly and severally liable.

(4) In computing the amount of
tax, additional tax or penalty under this Act
the amount shall be rounded off to the nearest
rupee, that is to say a fraction of a rupee
being fifty paise or more shall be rounded off
to the next higher rupee and any fraction less
than fifty paise shall be ignored."

8. Section 12 is in respect of non-use of
vehicle and refund of tax and in terms of subsection (2) thereof, the owner of a motor
vehicle, in case he does not intend to use his
vehicle, is required to surrender the certificate
of registration, before the date the tax is due, to
the Taxation Officer of the region, and upon
such surrender no tax under the Act shall be
payable in respect of such vehicle for each
complete calendar month of the period during
which the vehicle remains withdrawn from use
and
the
aforesaid
documents
remain
surrendered with the Taxation Officer. Section
12 of the Act, 1997, referred to above, is being
extracted below :-

"12. Non-use of vehicle and
refund of tax - (1) When any person who
has paid the tax in respect of a transport
vehicle, proves to the satisfaction of the
Taxation Officer in the prescribed manner
that the motor vehicle in respect whereof
such tax has been paid, has not been used
for a continuous period of one month or
more since the tax was last paid, he shall be
entitled to a refund of an amount equal to
one third of the rate of quarterly tax or one
twelfth of the yearly tax, as the case may be
payable in respect of such vehicle for each
thirty days of such period for which such
tax has been paid.

Provided that no such refund
shall be admissible unless such person has
surrendered the certificate of registration,
the token, if any, issued in respect of the
vehicle and the permit, if any, to the
Taxation Officer, before the period for
which such refund is claimed.

Provided further that where onetime tax has been paid for a motor vehicle
under sub-section (1-A) of Section 4, the
amount equivalent to 1/20 for each month
shall be refunded in respect of such vehicle.

(2) Where the operator or, as the
case may be, the owner of a motor vehicle,
9 All. Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
353
does not intend to use his vehicle for a
period of one month or more he shall,
before the date the tax or additional tax, as
the case may be, is due, surrender the
certificate of registration, the token, if any,
issued in respect of the motor vehicle and
the permit, if any, to the Taxation Officer
of the region where the tax or additional tax
was last paid and on such surrender, no tax
or additional tax under this Act shall be
payable in respect of such vehicle for each
complete calendar month of the period
during
which
the
vehicle
remains
withdrawn from use and the aforesaid
documents remain surrendered with the
Taxation Officer:

Provided that in case such vehicle
is found plying during the period when its
documents as mentioned in this sub-section
remain surrendered with the Taxation
Officer, such owner or operator, as the case
may be, shall be liable to the tax and the
additional tax as if the documents were not
surrendered and shall also be liable to the
penalty equivalent to five-times of the tax
and additional tax.

(3) Where the owner of a motor
vehicle in respect whereof one-time tax has
been paid under this Act proves to the
satisfaction of the Taxation officer in
prescribed manner that such motor vehicle
has not been used for a continuous period
of one month or more, he shall be entitled
to a refund of such tax may be specified by
the State Government by Notification in the
Gazette for the said period.

Provided that no such refund
shall be admissible, unless the certificate of
registration and the token, if any, issued in
respect of the vehicle are surrendered by
the owner with the Taxation Officer:

Provided further that the total
amount of refund under this sub-section
shall not exceed the one-time tax paid
under this Act.

(4) In calculating the amount of
refund under sub-section (3) any portion of
the period being less than a month shall be
ignored.

(5) The owner of a motor vehicle
other than a transport vehicle, in respect
whereof one time tax has been paid under
this Act shall be entitled to refund of such
tax at the rates specified by the State
Government by notification in the Gazette
on the ground that he has, after payment of
such tax, paid tax in respect of such vehicle
under any enactment relating to any tax on
motor vehicles in any other State or Union
Territory as a consequence of such vehicle
having been brought over permanently to
such other State or Union Territory or that
such motor vehicle has been converted into
a transport vehicle or that the registration of
such motor vehicle has been cancelled.

(6) Where any person who has
paid the tax other than one-time tax in
respect of an old motor vehicle, proves to
the satisfaction of the Taxation Officer that
the motor vehicle in respect of which such
tax has been paid, has not been used for a
continuous period of one month or more
since the tax or installment was last paid,
he shall be entitled to a refund of an
amount equal to one-twelfth of the rate of
annual tax payable in respect of such
vehicle for each complete calendar month
of such period for which such tax has been
paid:

Provided that no such refund
shall be admissible unless such person has
surrendered the certificate of registration
and the token, if any, issued in respect of
the vehicle to the Taxation Officer, before
the period for which such refund is
claimed.

(7) An operator of a transport
vehicle entitled to any refund of tax under
sub-section (1), shall also be entitled to
refund of such portion of the additional tax
354 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
paid under Section 6 as is attributable to the
period for which he is entitled to refund
under sub-section (1); and the amount of
such refund shall be calculated on the same
principle as is laid down in the said subsection.

(8) Where the operator, or as the
case may be, the owner of a motor vehicle
is unable to use his motor vehicle due to an
accident of the said vehicle and the
certificate of registration, the token, if any,
issued in respect of the said vehicle and the
permit, if any, are surrendered to the
Taxation Officer within a week from the
date of such accident together with a copy
of the first information report, such
surrender shall be deemed to have been
made on the date of the accident."

9. A conjoint reading of the
aforementioned statutory provisions make
it clear that as per the scheme under the
Act, 1997, the owner of a motor vehicle i.e.
a person whose name is entered in the
certificate of registration issued in respect
of such vehicle would be liable for tax as
per the rates applicable and no vehicle is to
be used in the State without payment of tax.
Further, the liability for payment of tax
would continue unless the owner applies
for
surrender
of
the
certificate
of
registration and only on such surrender, no
tax under the Act shall be payable in
respect of such vehicle for each complete
calendar month of the period during which
the vehicle remains withdrawn from use
and the documents remain surrendered with
the Taxation Officer.

10. The effect of failure to give prior
intimation and undertaking about non-use
of the vehicle and the presumption in such
case that the vehicle had been used or kept
for use within the State resulting in the
liability for payment of tax was considered
in the case of State of Orissa and others
Vs. Bijaya C. Tripathy2 and it was held
that if a transport vehicle has a valid
certificate of registration then it will be
presumed that the vehicle is kept for use
entailing the liability for payment of tax.
Referring to a similar provisions under the
Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975,
it was held as follows :-

"2. In order to consider the
correctness of this judgment it becomes
necessary to look at the relevant provisions
of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act.
Section 2 (b) defines a motor vehicle as any
vehicle which is mechanically propelled
and adapted for use upon roads whether the
power of propulsion is transmitted from an
external or internal source. It is an admitted
position that the respondent's vehicle is a
motor vehicle within the meaning of this
definition.

Section 3 reads as follows :

3. Levy of tax - (1) Subject to the
other provisions of this Act, there shall be
levied on every motor vehicle used or kept
for use within the State a tax at the rate
specified in Schedule I.

(2) The State Government may
by notification, from time to time, increase
the rate of tax specified in Schedule I :

Provided that such increase shall
not exceed fifty per cent of the rate
specified in Schedule I.

(3) All references made in this
Act to Schedule I shall be construed as
references to Schedule I as for the time
being amended in exercise of the powers
conferred by this section.

Explanation - An owner who
keeps a transport vehicle for which the
certificate of fitness and the certificate of
registration are valid, or an owner who
keeps any other motor vehicle, of which the
certificate of registration is valid, shall, for
9 All. Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
355
the purpose of this Act, be presumed to
keep such vehicle for use :

Provided that if the Taxing
Officer finds a motor vehicle having been
used on any day during the period for
which the registration certificate of a
vehicle has been suspended or cancelled
under the relevant provisions of the Motor
Vehicles Act such vehicle shall be deemed
to have been kept for use for the whole
period without payment of tax.

4. Thus, it has to be seen that tax
is levied on every motor vehicle which is
"used or kept for use". The Explanation
makes it very clear that if a transport
vehicle has a valid certificate of fitness and
a valid certificate of registration then it will
be presumed that the vehicle is kept for use.
This presumption arises in respect of all
motor vehicles, whether they are light
motor vehicles or transport vehicles and
would also include vehicles which do not
have a stage carriage permit.

5. Section 4 provides that the tax
is to be paid in advance by the registered
owner or person having possession or
control of the vehicle.

6. Section 10 which is also
relevant reads as follows :

10. prior intimation of temporary
discontinuance of use of a vehicle - (1)
Whenever any motor vehicle is intended
not to be used for any period, the registered
owner or person having possession or
control thereof shall on or before the date
of expiry of the term for which tax has been
paid, deliver to the Taxing Officer, an
undertaking duly signed and verified in the
prescribed form and manner specifying the
period aforesaid and the place where the
motor vehicle is to be kept along with such
other particulars as may be prescribed and
the
registration
certificate,
fitness
certificate, permit and tax token, then
current and shall from time to time by
delivering, further undertakings give prior
intimation to the Taxing Officer concerned
of the extension, if any, of the said period
and the changes, if any, of the place where
the motor vehicle shall be kept:

Provided
that
no
such
undertaking shall relate to a period
exceeding one year at a time.

(2) If at any time during the
period covered by an undertaking as
aforesaid the motor vehicle is found being
used or is kept at a place in contravention
of any such undertaking, such vehicle shall,
for the purposes of this Act be deemed to
have been used throughout the said period
without payment of tax.

(3) In the absence of any
undertaking delivered under sub-section (1)
every motor vehicle liable to tax under this
Act shall be deemed to have been used or
kept for use within the State.

7. Thus under Section 10 if a
person is not intending to use a motor
vehicle for any period then intimation has
to be given along with an undertaking and
the documents mentioned therein have to
be handed over to the Taxation Officer.
Sub-section (3) makes it very clear that in
the absence of any undertaking under subsection (1) it shall be presumed that the
motor vehicle has been used or kept for use
withing the State."

11. A similar view had earlier been
taken in the case of State of Karnataka
Vs.
K.Gopalakrishna
Shenoy
and
another3, wherein in the context of
Mysore Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957
it was held that the owner having a motor
vehicle, in respect of which a certificate of
registration is current, is bound to pay the
tax even if the vehicle is incapable of being
put in use. It was held that the principle
underlying the Taxation Act is that every
motor vehicle having a certificate of
356 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
registration is to be deemed a potential user
of the roads all through the time the
certificate of registration is current and
therefore, liable to pay tax. The relevant
observations made in the judgment are as
follows :-

"7...The resultant position that
emerges is that Section 3 (1) confers a right
upon the State to levy a tax on all motor
vehicles which are suitably designed for
use on roads at prescribed rates without
reference to the roadworthy condition of
the vehicle or otherwise. Section 4 enjoins
every registered owner or person having
possession or control of the motor vehicle
to pay the tax in advance. The Explanation
to Section 3 (1) contains a deeming
provision and its effect is that as long as the
certificate of registration of a motor vehicle
is current it must be deemed to be a vehicle
suitable for use on the roads. The inevitable
consequence of the Explanation would be
that the owner or a person having control or
possession of a motor vehicle as long as the
certificate
of
registration
is
current
irrespective of the condition of the vehicle
for use on the roads and irrespective of
whether the vehicle had a certificate of
fitness with concurrent validity or not..."

8...The scheme of the Taxation
Act is such that the tax due on a motor
vehicle has got to be paid in terms of
Section 3 at the prescribed rate and in
advance and the liability to pay tax
continues as long as the certificate of
registration is current but if it so happens
that in spite of the certificate of registration
being current, the vehicle had not actually
been put to use for the whole of the period
or a continuous part thereof, not being less
than one calendar month, the person paying
the tax should apply to the prescribed
authority and obtain a refund of the tax for
the appropriate period after satisfying the
authorities about the truth and genuineness
of his claim. Sections 3 and 4 are absolute
in their terms and the liability to pay the tax
in advance is not dependent upon the
vehicle being covered by a certificate of
fitness or not. Even if the vehicle was not
in a roadworthy condition and could not be
put to use on the roads without the
necessary repairs being carried out, the
owner or person having possession or
control of a vehicle is enjoined to pay the
tax on the vehicle and then seek a refund.
Perhaps in exceptional cases where the
vehicle has met with a major accident or
where it is in need of such extensive repairs
that it would be impossible to put the
vehicle to use or where the transport
authorities themselves prohibit the use of
the vehicle due to its defective condition
and cancel the certificate of fitness or
suspend it, the person concerned may
surrender the certificate of registration and
other documents like permit etc. and seek
the permission of the transport authorities
to waive the payment of tax on the ground
that no proof of non-user was necessary
and as such payment of tax on the one hand
and an automatic application for refund on
the other would be a needless ritualistic
formality and if the permission sought for
is granted, he need not pay the tax. In all
other cases the only course left open is for
the person concerned to pay the tax in
advance and thereafter apply to the
authorities and obtain refund of tax after
proving that the vehicle was not fit for use
on the roads and has in fact not been made
use of. The principle underlying the
Taxation Act is that every motor vehicle
issued a certificate of registration is to be
deemed a potential user of the roads all
through
the
time
the
certificate
of
registration is current and therefore liable
to pay tax under Section 3 (1) read with
Section 4. If however, the vehicle had not
9 All. Raj Kishore Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
357
made use of the roads because it could not
be put on the roads due to repairs, even
though the certificate of registration was
current, the owner or person concerned has
to seek for and obtain refund of the tax paid
in advance after satisfying the authorities
about the truth of his claim. It is not for the
transport authorities to justify the demand
for tax by proving that the vehicle is in a fit
condition and can be put to use on the roads
or that it had plied on the roads without
payment of tax. It would be absolutely
impossible for the State to keep monitoring
all the vehicles and prove that each and
every registered vehicle is in a fit condition
and would be making use of the roads and
is therefore liable to pay the tax. For that
reason the State had made the payment of
tax compulsory on every registered vehicle
and that too in advance and has at the same
time provided for the grant of refund of tax
whenever the person paying the tax has not
made use of the roads by plying the vehicle
and substantiates his claim by proper proof.
Any view to the contrary would defeat the
purpose and intent of the Taxation Act and
would also afford scope and opportunity
for some of the persons liable to pay the tax
to ply the vehicle unlawfully without
payment of tax and later on justify their
non-payment by setting up a plea that the
vehicle was in repair for a continuous
period of over a month or the whole of a
quarter, half-year or year as they choose to
claim."

12. In the facts of the present case
there is no dispute that the petitioner is the
registered owner of the vehicle in question
and that the said registration has not been
surrendered by him till date. In view of the
above, the liability for the payment of tax is
entirely upon the petitioner. Submission of
learned counsel for the petitioner that since
the vehicle has been handed over to the
dealer, he is not liable for payment of tax is
unacceptable inasmuch as the definition of
the owner contained in Section 2 (h) of the
Act, 1997 clearly provides that the owner
of a motor vehicle i.e. a person whose
name is entered in the certificate of
registration issued in respect of such
vehicle would be liable for tax as per the
rates applicable. The question as to whether
the petitioner was in possession of the
vehicle or otherwise would be immaterial
and so long as the vehicle continues to be
registered in his name indicating that he is
a registered owner the liability on the
petitioner in respect of payment of tax does
not cease.

13. Moreover, the petitioner having
not applied for surrender of certificate of
registration, as per the scheme of the Act,
1997 the liability for payment of tax
continues to be of the petitioner.

14. The scheme of the Act, 1997
creates a liability on the owner of a motor
vehicle for payment of tax and also of
imposition of penalty in case of default.
The owner of the motor vehicle is thus
statutorily obliged to pay the tax as long as
the certificate of registration is current and
in the event the owner does not intend to
use his vehicle, he is required to surrender
the certificate of registration and only upon
such surrender having been made to the
Taxation Officer the owner can make a
claim that no tax is payable.

15. We may reiterate the principle
underlying the Motor Vehicles Taxation
Act, 1997 that every motor vehicle in
respect of which a certificate of registration
has been issued is to be deemed a potential
user of the roads during the period when
the certificate of registration is current
creating a liability upon the owner to pay
358 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the tax. The non-use of the vehicle may
entitle the owner to seek a refund after
proving to the satisfaction of the Taxation
Officer in the prescribed manner that the
motor vehicle in respect whereof the tax
has been paid, had not been used, as
provided for under Section 12 of the Act,
1997 subject to surrender of the certificate
of registration.

16. The plea that the vehicle was not
in a road worthy condition and could not be
put to use on the roads without necessary
repairs being carried out cannot absolve the
owner or the person having possession of
the vehicle from the liability to pay tax. In
the event of the vehicle having not been put
to use on the roads during the currency of
the certificate of registration it is open to
the owner of the vehicle or the person
concerned to apply for refund of tax in the
manner prescribed. The law does not
require the Taxation Officer to justify the
demand for tax by proving that the vehicle
is in a fit condition and can be put to use or
that it had actually been plied on the roads.
The payment of tax and that too in advance
on every registered vehicle has been made
compulsory. At the same time the statute
also creates a provision for grant of refund
of tax whenever the person paying the tax
has not made use of the road by plying the
vehicle and substantiates his claim to the
satisfaction of the Taxation Officer. A
further
provision
for
surrender
of
registration has also been made in a case
where the owner of a motor vehicle does
not intend to use his vehicle for a period of
one month or more.

17. The payment of tax on every
registered vehicle having been made
compulsory as per the terms of the Act,
1997, the plea that the vehicle was in
repair/maintenance cannot be a ground to
evade the liability for payment of tax by the
owner of the motor vehicle whose name is
entered in the certificate of registration in
the absence of the certificate having been
surrendered as per the statutory provisions.
Any other view would defeat the intent and
purpose of the Taxation Act.

18. In view of the foregoing
discussions, we do not find any merit in the
writ petition.

19.

The
writ
petition
stands
accordingly dismissed.
----------
(2020)09ILR A358
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 22.07.2020

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.

Writ-B No. 25271 of 1988

Roop Narain & Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
D.D.C. , Varanasi & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sri D.S.P. Singh, Sri C.S. Garg, Sri D.S.
Mishra, Sri Dhan Shyam Mishra, Sushma
Devi, Sri Bipin Kumar Singh

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
S.C., Sri Hari Kesh Singh, Sri O.P.
Srivastava, Sri Ram Chandra, Sri Ratnesh
Srivastava

A. U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act,
1953 - Section 12-objections filed by the
petitioners-the burden lies on petitioner
who assails a registered conveyance as
one executed by an imposter, has not
been discharged by the petitioners beyond
reasonable doubt-order passed by D.D.C.
can not be faulted-jurisdiction of the