V L B TRUST Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the first respondent dated 17. 4. 97 in R. No. 20822/a1/97, in and by which, the first respondent has made a demand of Rs. 12,950/- by way of the balance motor vehicle tax payable by the petitioner along with 100% penalty, in all, a sum of rs. 25,900/ -. THE said determination has been made for the period 1. 4. 1994 to 31. 3. 1996. In the impugned order, it is merely stated that from the communication of the Accountant General (Audit), the second respondent herein, dated 21. 2. 97, the collection of Rs. 2,000/- as annual tax was contrary to the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and that the tax should have been levied on the basis of Rs. 50/- per seat. It was on that footing, the claim came to be made by the first respondent in the impugned order.

(2.) MR. Hariharan, learned counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that under Section 66 (3) (h) of the Motor Vehicles Act, as it stood thus, it was stipulated that the vehicles owned by educational institutions need not secure a permit as provided under Section 66 (1) of the said Act, that the said exemption under Section 66 (3) (h) came to be deleted by Act 27 of 2000 with effect from 14. 11. 1994 and thereby, the petitioner, which is an educational institution and who owns the vehicle bearing Registration no. TMV-1610 is supported by valid permit after the deletion of clause (h) to sub-section 3 of Section 66, in which event the tax liability of the petitioner will have to be worked out based on the provision of the Tamil Nadu Motor vehicles Taxation Act. As far as the rate of tax is concerned, the same has been prescribed in the First schedule of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation act.