FATHIMA SHIRIN Vs. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the purchase value of a vehicle, for the purpose of levy of tax under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, include the tax suffered under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act Appellant purchased a motor vehicle as per retail invoice which shows the unit price, gross value and net value of that vehicle as Rs. 8,81,004.41. Value Added Tax (VAT) levied is added to make up the amount total payable to be Rs. 9,99,940.00 The authority under the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975, for short, 'M.V.T. Act', insisted on adding not only the VAT component reflected by the retail invoice, but also an additional component towards VAT attributed to revision of rate of VAT. The challenge to such demand was negatived by the learned single Judge holding that the date of registration is what is relevant under the M.V.T. Act. The appellant stood criticised on behalf of the Department that an invoice was generated in March, 2013 anticipating a hike in VAT by April, 2013.

(2.) In this appeal against the decision of the learned single Judge, among other grounds raised on the basis of the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act, Arts. 245 and 265 of the Constitution and the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for short, the 'VAT Act' it is specifically contended and argued that the levy can be only on the purchase value of the vehicle, which does not include VAT or any other tax or duty, having regard to the definition of the term "purchase value" in S. 2(e) of the M.V.T. Act. Levy under the VAT Act also appears to be indicative that, in no way, the VAT component could be brought as part of the 'purchase value' of the vehicle for the purpose of determining the tax under the M.V.T. Act, it is argued.

(3.) Learned Government Pleader, supporting the impugned judgment pointed out that the instance in hand could be a case of predated issuance of invoice, with intention to get over the additional liability of increased rate of VAT, applicable with effect from 1.4.2013. He also argued that the amount suffered by the end consumer, that is, the amount spent by the purchaser of the vehicle, is to be treated as the price paid for the purchase of the vehicle and such amount should be treated as the basis for the levy of tax under the M.V.T. Act.