INTELLIGENCE OFFICER Vs. RAY CONSTRUCTION LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that arises for consideration in this case is whether an excavator not running on inflated types, but on iron chain plates such as a caterpillar vehicle or a military tank would be a motor vehicle within the meaning of Section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with section 2(1)(j) of the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 and therefore would fall under Entry 1 of the schedule to the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 and is liable to tax under section 3 of the said Act.

(2.) Original petition was preferred by the respondent herein seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P8 order passed by the third respondent holding that the excavator owned by the petitioner is motor vehicle and liable to pay entry tax as per Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994. Learned single Judge allowed the writ petition holding that the excavator in question is not a motor vehicle within the meaning of section 2 (28) of the Motor Vehicles Act due to its distinguishing features compared to other types of escavators. Aggrieved by the same this appeal has been preferred by the state.

(3.) Sri. Raju Joseph, Special Govt. Pleader (Taxes) referred to section 2(1)(j) of the Kerala Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 1994 and submitted that a reading of the definition that a motor vehicle should have inflated types. Counsel submitted question as to whether excavator is moving on chain as in the case of military tank or activator is moving on chains in the case of military tank or caterpillar is of no consequence since such a vehicle is also a motor vehicle adapted for use on public roads. Counsel referred to the decision of this court in Baiju Joseph v. State of Kerala and another, (1998) 6 KTR 2 and submitted that the court held that excavators and road rollers are liable to entry tax and the said decision was affirmed by the apex court in Bose Abraham v. State of Kerala and another, (2001) 9 KTR 336. Counsel submitted, it is common knowledge that road rollers are not used for carrying passengers or luggage still the apex court has taken the view that road rollers are motor vehicles and there is no justification in excluding excavators.