PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. N T KATHIRVELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State against the acquittal pf the respondent on a charge of not paying the tax due for the quarter. There is no doubt about the fact that on 4-10-1955 the lorry in question, i. e. , M. D. J. 832 was found on the road. It was noticed by the Inspector and on subsequent verification it was found that the tax for the vehicle was not paid for the quarter.

(2.) IT may also be stated that M. D. J. 2025, another vehicle, has been substituted for this vehicle, as this vehicle was condemned as unfit for use, and for the vehicle m. D. J. 2025 tax has been paid for the entire quarter. The question is whether the payment of tax for the entire quarter for the subsequent vehicle exonerates the payment of tax for the vehicle M. D. J. 832, which was found on the road on 4-101955.

(3.) THE finding of the vehicle on the road on the 4th shows that this vehicle used the road, and when once a vehicle is put on the road, it has got to pay the tax for that quarter. But if the vehicle does not use the road subsequently, then under the rules a refund will be granted if the authorities are satisfied that this vehicle did not use the road subsequently. Except this concession, the mere fact of substitution of one vehicle by another does not exonerate the first vehicle from payment of tax.