REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

M. KRISHNAPPAN Appellant

V/S

The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary to Government, Home (Transport) Department And Another Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

FREIGHTLINES AND CONSTRUCTION HOLDING LTD.,V. STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENT LTD. V. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER CUM TAXING AUTHORITY,ROURKELA AND OTHERS V. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
PURSHOTTAM GOVINDJI HALAI VS. B M DESAI ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
RAJA JAGANNATH BAKSH SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
KHANDIGE SHAM BHAT K KRISHNA BHATTA VS. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER KASARAGOD:AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER KASARAGOD [REFERRED TO]
TWYFORD TEA COMPANY LIMITED VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
MURTHY MATCH WORKS VS. ASSTT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE [REFERRED TO]
BOLANI ORES LIMITED DALMIA CEMENT BHARAT LIMITED BOLANI ORES LIMITED VS. STATF OF ORISSA:THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BALLERY MYSORE :STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA STATE OF MYSORE VS. D P SHARMA:B A JAYARAM [REFERRED TO]
G K KRISHNAN A SUBRAMANYAM SIVA TOURISTS VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU:GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU:STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
INTERNATIONAL TOURIST CORPORA TION AVTAR SINGH NANAKSAR BUS SERVICE VS. STATE OF HARYANA:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MALWA BUS SERVICE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. K GOPALAKRISHNA SHENOY [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA BHASKAR RAMKRISHNA MARKANDEYA VS. MADHUKAR BALKRTSHNA BADTYA:STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
VENKATESHWARA THEATRE VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
VENKATA RAO VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for the issue of writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction to declare Section 4(1-A)(a) read with Schedule 3 Part-I of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1974 as amended, as unconstitutional, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of INdia and inconsistent with Scheme of Sec. 3 and 4 (1-A)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Taxation Act in so far as it imposes a compulsory demand of lifetax with differential tax structure for the petitioner in respect of new Motor Vehicles to be registered in the State of Tamil Nadu.

(2.) THE relief prayed for in all the writ petitions are identical. In all the Writ Petitions, common contentions have been raised. Hence, these writ petitions were ordered to be consolidated.

(3.) IT is also contended mat the impugned amendment under Section 4(1-A)(a) is also inconsistent with Section 4(1-A)(b) of the Act which provides for payment of tax either annually under first schedule or prorata life tax under third schedule in respect of old cars. The impugned provisions are to that extent discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Click here to view full judgment.

M KRISHNAPPAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address