SURESH SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Section 5 of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994, makes every owner of a registered motor vehicle liable to pay tax on such vehicle at the rate as specified in the Schedule to the Act. S. 17 of the Act read with Ss.18 and 19 stipulates that if prior intimation of temporary discontinuance of use of the vehicle is given to the Taxing Officer in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Rules, the registered owner can be granted benefit of exemption from payment of tax or refund of tax for the period during which the vehicle was not in use. The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No. BEN 6555 and claims exemption from payment of tax for the period 15-3-2000 to 16-9-2000 on the ground that during this period the vehicle was not in use the same having been forcibly taken away by MCC terrorists.

(2.) Under S. 31 of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994 the State Government has been given power to make rules for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the Act. Sub-section (2) of S. 31 of the Act, in particular stipulates that the State Government shall have the power to make rules for prescribing the form of undertaking to be delivered under S. 17 and the particulars to be stated therein etc. Accordingly, the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1994 were framed in exercise of the power conferred on the State Government by the aforesaid Act. Whereas Rule 13 requires the registered owner to convey the intimation for temporary discontinuance of the use of the vehicle in form J', Rule 15 prescribes procedures for enquiry in respect of temporary discontinuance of the vehicle. For ready reference, we reproduce hereinbelow Rule 15, which reads thus :-

(3.) Section 17 itself lays down that the registered owner shall furnish an undertaking duly signed and verified in the prescribed form, specifying the period during which the vehicle was incapable of being used and the place where the vehicle was to be kept during this period. The expression occurring in sub-section (1) of Section 17 the place where motor vehicle used to be kept'has to be read in conjunction with Rules 13 and 15 of 1994 Rules, because in Form J'which is based on Rule 13, there is a column, which requires the registered owner to specify the place where the vehicle was parked during the period of non-use and Rule 15 clearly enjoins upon the Taxing Officer the duty to carry out physical verification of the parking place at least once in a month in a random manner. The consequence of the vehicle not being found at the place of parking as mentioned in Form J'has also been spelt out in Rule 15. It is an undisputed case before us (as set up by the petitioner and not controverted by the respondents) that Form J'in terms of Rule 13 (supra) was duly submitted and in column 5 thereof the place of parking was mentioned as Bachra Kali Mandir'and the period since when vehicle was incapable of being used was shown as starting from 15,3.2000. It, therefore, clearly emerges that it was the duty of the Taxing Officer to have satisfied himself with respect to the factum of the parking of the vehicle at the aforesaid place and it was open to the Taxing Officer, if, on physical verification, he found that the vehicle was not parked at that place, to refuse to grant exemption from payment of tax. Unfortunately, this did not happen. This requirement was not complied with by the Taxing Officer. Earlier also, the petitioner's request for exemption was turned down as accordingly, he challenging that order, moved this Court by filing CJWC No. 15 of 2001 and this Court, vide order dated 8-6-2001, directed the respondents to reconsider the issue in its perspective and pass, an appropriate order the operative part of that judgment reads thus:- "After hearing the learned counsel for the parties we dispose of this petition and by setting aside the order dated 4-4-2001 passed by the respondent No. 4, direct him to reconsider the issue in the light of the observations made hereinabove and to decide and find out as to whether, as a matter of fact, the petitioner did surrender the papers of the vehicle for the aforesaid period to the respondent No. 3 and if so, what was the effect of such surrender of papers with respect to the petitioner's claim for exemption from payment of road tax during this period. The respondent No. 4 shall decide the aforesaid question and pass appropriate consequential orders on reconsideration after hearing the party."