Full Judgment Text
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3325 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.216 of 2007)
Prahlad Singh & Anr. ....Appellants
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ....Respondents
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3330 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 12499 of 2007)
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3331-3332 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 19086-87 of 2007)
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3329 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 2916 of 2007)
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3328 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 2919 of 2007)
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3327 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 2922 of 2007)
With
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3326 of 2009
(Arising out of SLP(C ) No. 347 of 2007)
With
W.P. (C ) NO. 39 OF 2007
With
W.P. (C ) NO. 40 OF 2007
J U D G M E N T
Dr. ARIJTI PASAYAT, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of
the Allahabad High Court. Several Petitions were disposed of by a
common judgment and the writ petitions were dismissed. The writ
petitioners had questioned the vires of Article II of Part D of the First
Schedule of the Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Taxation Act’). Order dated 30.10.2000
passed by the Transport Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow was also
questioned. The High Court noted that in the meeting held on
20.4.1999 decision was taken by the Transport Commissioner not to
realize the Additional Tax at the rate of Rs.45/- per metric ton as
provided under Article II of Part D of the First Schedule of the
Taxation Act. By order dated 30.10.2000 the Transport Commissioner
2
had informed all his subordinate authorities that the decision had since
been revoked and tax in accordance with law was to be realised.
3. According to the writ petitioners they were Stage Carriage Operators,
they have own buses and operate them on the strength of permanent
Stage Carriage Permit granted in their favour by the Regional
Transport Authority. Prior to the commencement of the Taxation Act,
taxes were realised from the transport operators under the provisions of
different enactments enacted i.e. United Provinces Motor Vehicle
Taxation Act, 1935, Motor Gadi (Yatri Kar) Adhiniyam, 1962 and U.P.
Motor Gadi (Maal Kar) Adhiniyam, 1963.
4. The Taxation Act replaced the aforesaid three acts and it became
operative from 9.11.1998. The writ petitioner contented that they had
paid road tax under Section 4 of Uttar Pradesh Motor Vehicle Taxation
Act, 1935 (in short the 1935 Act’) which was replaced by Section 4 of
the Taxation Act. They had paid a tax at the rate of Rs.2015/- per
quarter inclusive of Rs.45 for the luggage of passengers in respect of 55
seater vehicle. With the coming into force of the Taxation Act the
Authorities started demanding additional tax at the rate of Rs.45/- for
every metric ton on the gross vehicles weight of the vehicle or part
3
thereof in terms of Article II of Part D of the First Schedule of the Act.
On protest being raised by the transport operators, a decision was taken
by the Transport Commissioner on 20.4.1999 and direction was issued
to the subordinate authorities to obtain affidavit from the Stage Carriage
operator to the effect that they do not carry goods in their vehicle except
the personal luggage of the passengers and on filing of such affidavit
the tax demanded under the new provision shall not be realised from
them.
5. The High Court held that in a vehicle which is covered by the Stage
Carriage Permit, luggage of the passengers as also the goods are
permitted to be carried. The only restriction is that the weight of goods
and passengers luggage and that of the passenger including the weight
of unladen vehicle should not exceed the gross vehicle’s weight.
6. The High Court after referring to various provisions observed that
Article II is attracted when passengers’ goods whether it is personal
luggage of the passenger or not is transported in the vehicle. Thus the
State Carriage Permit holder were liable to pay tax under Article II of
Part D of the First Schedule of the Act. Therefore, the Writ Petitions
were dismissed. It was the stand of learned counsel for the appellants
4
that since goods have not been defined under the Taxation Act, in view
of the specific provisions of the Taxation Act i.e. Section 2(o) recourse
to the definition given in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the
‘Act’) has to be taken.
7. It was submitted that there is no scope for carrying any goods of the
passengers and in fact they had not carried any such goods in the Stage
Carriage, except the personal luggage and, therefore, they were not
liable to pay any tax under the aforesaid Article.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand supported
the judgment of the High Court.
9. Some of the relevant provisions of the Taxation Act read as follow:
"U.P. MOTOR VEHICLES TAXATION ACT, 1997:
2.Definitions. In this Act,
a) "additional tax" means a tax imposed under Section 5 or Section 6 in
addition to the tax imposed under Section 4.
d) "goods carriage" means motor vehicle constructed or adapted
wholly or partly for use for the carriage of goods, or any motor
vehicles not so constructed or adapted when used for the carriage of
goods either solely or in addition to passenger, and includes a trailer
5
but does not include a motor cab, or a maxi cab or a contract carriage
or stage carriage where such contract carriage or stage carriage is
authorised to carry a limited quantity of load;
e) "limited quantity of load" means such quantity of load, not
exceeding the limits determined by the Transport- Commissioner,
Uttar Pradesh, as the Registering Authority may specify in the
registration certificate in respect of a vehicle.
…. …. …
(1) "tax" means any tax levied under section 4;
(o) words and expressions used but not defined in this Act and defined
in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, shall have the respect meaning
assigned to them in that Act,"
4. Imposition of Tax -
(1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act or the rules made
thereunder, no motor vehicle other than a transport vehicle, shall be
used in any public place in Uttar Pradesh unless a one-time tax at the
rate applicable in respect of such motor vehicle, specified in Part `B'
of the First Schedule has been paid in respect thereof;
6
Provided that in respect of an old motor vehicle, instead of a one-time
tax, annual tax at the rate applicable to such motor vehicle as
specified in Part ‘C’ of the First Schedule may be-paid.
(2) Save as otherwise provided by or under this Act no transport
vehicle shall be used in any public place in Uttar Pradesh unless a tax
at the rate applicable to such motor vehicle, as specified in Part `D' of
the First Schedule has been paid in respect thereof.
(3) Where any motor vehicle other than a transport vehicle, in respect
whereof one-time tax has been paid, is operated as a transport
vehicle, the tax payable under this Act on such transport vehicle shall
be payable."
Sub-Section (2) of Section 4 further provides that tax is to paid at the
rate specified in Part D of First Schedule. Under Part D Petitioners are
required to pay in Article I Item 7 as they have been carrying more
than 35 passenger. The said item No.7 for ready reference reads as
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 2 3
______________________________________________________
"7 With seating capacity for more than
exclusive of the driver;
a) if intended for use on "A-Class" route Rs. 1115.00+
Rs. 45.00 for
Every seat in excess of thirty five
seats.
7
b) if intended for use on "B-Class route Rs. 900.00 +
Rs. 35.00 for
every seat in excess
of thirty five seats.
Explanation:- For the purpose of this Article, fifty percent of the
sanctioned standing capacity, if any, shall
reckoned as additional seating capacity.
Vehicles plying for the conveyance of
Limited number of passengers and the trans
Port of a limited quantity of passengers'
Goods, the tax payable under Article I in
Respect of the authorized number of
Passenger seats in addition to tax for
Every metric ton of the registered laden
Weight of the vehicle, or part thereof,” 45.00
III _________________
IV _________________
Explanation: Where any motor vehicle is used for various
purposes or in such a manner as to cause it to be
taxable more than one Article of this Schedule, the
tax payable shall be at the highest appropriate rate."
10. The only question that needs to be adjudicated is whether Article II has
application. It is the stand of the appellants that under Part D, the
appellants are required to pay in Article I item VII as they have been
carrying more than 35 passengers.
11. It needs to be noted that in Writ Petition No. 6266 (M/B) of 2000, it has
been observed by the High Court as follows:
8
“it is therefore, clarified that if the vehicle of the petitioners is
covered under more than one Articles of Part D of the Ist
Schedule of the Act, then the highest rate mentioned under
either of the Article would be payable. To give an illustration,
if a vehicle falls under Article I and also under Article II of part
D of the Ist Schedule, then the amount of tax payable under
both the Articles have to be calculated and the amount which is
higher shall be payable. The amount payable by a vehicle
owner, if his vehicle under Article II, would be higher than the
amount payable under Article I as under Article II the amount
which is payable is in addition to the amount payable under
Article I and not limited to only Rs.45/- per ton.”
12. In our opinion because of the explanation the view expressed; as
noted above indicates the correct view, Article II operates when goods are
carried and it does apply to passengers’ luggage.
13. The appeals and writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. There
shall be no orders as to costs.
.............................................J.
(Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)
..............................................J.
(V.S. SIRPURKAR)
...............................................J.
(ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)
New Delhi,
May 06, 2009
9