RAJIV BHANDARY Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER UDUPT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, questioning the correctness of the order on the file of the first respondent dated 27th December 2002 in Proceedings No. RTO/u/ka-19-A-3333/tax/02-03 and the confirmation order on the file of the second respondent in proceedings No. DTC/s/appeal/tax32/ 2002-03 dated 2nd September 2003 vide annexures A and B respectively, has presented the instant writ petition.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that, the petitioner herein is the owner of bus bearing No. KA-19/3333. Since, the said vehicle was required for major repair, the petitioner filed an application for permission to surrender the documents while intimating the non-use of the vehicle for the purpose of tax exemption as per the provisions of the karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. The surrender was accepted by the first respondent.

(3.) WHEN things stood thus, in the surrender application, the place of garage for the vehicle was mentioned as M/s. Aravind motors, NH-17, Kundapur. Due to bona fide mistake, after intimating the surrender, the said vehicle was shifted to M/s. Navdurga bus Body Repairs, NH-17, Udayavara, Udupi and thereafter from one garage to another garage and his was not brought to the notice of the respondents by the petitioner since he was out of station. Thereafter, this has been informed to the concerned authority. The first respondent has issued the tax demand notice demanding a sum of Rs. 02,02,104/- for the period between 1st July 2001 to 31st March 2003. Fe. eling aggrieved by the tax demand notice dated 27th December 2002, the petitioner filed an appeal on the file of the second respondent. The appellate authority has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner. Assailing the correctness of the impugned tax demand notice and the order passed by the second respondent, the petitioner has presented the instant writ petition.