Judgment

Kapadia, J.

1. The short question which arises for determination in this civil appeal, by special leave, is whether the taxation authority under the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 was right in taxing the "tractor-trailer" as a separate and distinct vehicle, different from a tractor and denying exemption sought by the appellant under section 16 of the said 1957 Act on the ground that the tractor-trailer was a distinct category of "goods carriage" requiring permit under section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

2. The brief facts which are relevant to be noticed as under:

The appellant are transporters of heavy equipments using mechanized carriage depending upon the items to be transported. During the period 8.12.1989 to 31.3.1990, they were engaged by Central Power Research Institute of India (CPRI) to transport for them six units of transformers from Madras Port to its site at Bangalore. The goods were to be lifted from Madras Port and transported to CPRI at Bangalore by vehicular transport mode through the States of Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. In the matter of transportation of over-dimensional cargo, the appellant made use of a drawing vehicle, called by the appellant as a tractor to push/pull the trailers loaded with the abovementioned equipments.

3. Between 8.12.1989 and 11.1.1990, three units of the tractor-trailer carrying transformers entered the State of Karnataka via Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh.

4. On 18.1.1990, on account of the entry of three units of tractor-trailer, the taxation authority issued four demand notices calling upon the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.5.69 lacs as tax under section 3(2) read with item 10 of part B of the schedule to the said 1957 Act on the ground that the said three units were transport vehicles, which required permits under section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and that the appellant was liable to pay the said tax on the weight(s) of the three units.

5. Being aggrieved by the confirmation of the demand dated 7.2.1990, the appellant moved the Deputy Commissioner of Transport, in appeal.

6. By his order dated 30.6.1990, the Deputy Commissioner of Transport held that although the tractor and the trailer were separate independent motor vehicles, separately registrable, the tractor-trailer as a unit was a different category of "goods carriage" requiring permit under section 66 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was not obtained and, therefore, the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of exemption under section 16 of the Taxation Act, 1957.

7. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 30.6.1990, the appellant herein moved the Karnataka High Court by way of writ petition no.17851 of 1990. In the writ petition, the appellant pleaded that its tractors and trailers were registered in the State of Maharashtra as non-transport vehicles and transport vehicles respectively; that they had obtained national permits for their trailers under section 88(12) of the M.V. Act, 1988 which enabled them to ply trailers in the State of Karnataka; that tractors and trailers, though motor vehicles, were separately defined under section 2(44) and under section 2(46) of the M.V. Act, 1988; that under section 46 of the M.V. Act, a certificate of registration was issued in respect of such vehicles which was effective for the whole of the country (including State of Karnataka) and that if the contention of the department is upheld that the tractor-trailer is a distinct and separate vehicle, distinct from the tractor, it would undermine and violate section 46 of the M.V. Act; that the registration of a vehicle in one State shall be effective and in force throughout India.

8. By judgment and order dated 27.3.1998, the learned single judge held that the tractor by itself was not a "transport vehicle" but if it was used for carrying goods or passengers then it became a "goods carriage" as defined under section 2(14) and consequently, a transport vehicle under section