KANKER ROADWAYS Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the demand notice dated 08.06.2012 (Annexure P/7) on the ground that the same is illegal and unconstitutional, and further, to direct refund of the amount deposited by the petitioner under protest.

(2.) THE brief facts, as projected by the petitioners, are that the petitioner is a firm engaged in the business of plying buses under the Stage Carriage Permit. The petitioner was granted one inter-State Stage Carriage permit on 13.10.2009 for one of its vehicle i.e. Bus bearing registration No. CG-04-E-1638, duly counter signed by the State of Jharkhand, on the route from Raipur to Daltenganj in Jharkhand. The said permit was modified on 06.01.2010 and a new vehicle bearing registration No. CG-04-E-2034 was substituted. The petitioner could not ply the bus on account of certain difficulties. The petitioner submitted his permit with the authorities on 03.12.2012 with various applications under Form M (Annexure P/2 collectively). According to the petitioner, the naxalites made the road non-motorable. The petitioner deposited Form M every month with fee of Rs. 500/-. On 31.03.2011, a specific application under Form M was filed stating therein that the said bus was not plying under the permit. However, according to petitioner, after deposit of the permit, the same vehicle under different permit on different route was plying.

(3.) ON the other hand, Shri Moorthy, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents would submit that alternative statutrory remedy under section 20 of the Act. This Court, relying on the aforesaid provision, in W.P.(T) No. 25/2012 declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that an appeal under section 20 of the Act has to be availed before filing a writ petition. Shri Moorthy would also submits that notice was not given, however, proper assessment was made. It is further contended that the deposit of the tax amount was made not under protest. On the issue of opportunity of hearing, the return of the State/respondents is silent and no denial by the counsel also.