Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

1. These matters have been referred to the larger bench by the order dated 30.11.2011 of a Full Bench of this Court in W.A.No.20/2008. The Full Bench expressed a difference of opinion with the views expressed by another Full Bench in Regional Transport Officer v. Abdurahiman -[2007 (1) KLT 6131. on the issue of whether a claim for exemption from motor vehicle tax, in respect of vehicles that were in police custody. could be allowed only in accordance with the procedure contemplated in Section 5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), read with the provisions of Rule 10 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). The earlier Full Bench. while considering cases of detention of vehicles in police custody, pursuant to a non-payment of tax under the Act, had opined that a claim for exemption from tax under the Act could be maintained only in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 thereof, and by following the procedure contemplated in Rule 10 of the Rules. In the alternative, it was held that the person claiming exemption in such cases could also opt for paying the tax first and then claiming a refund of the tax so paid by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 6 of the Act read with Rule 15 of the Rules. The referring Full Bench, however, while dealing with cases where the detention of the vehicle in police custody was for reasons other than non-payment of tax under the Act, opined that a claim for exemption from tax under the Act could be maintained in accordance with the provisions of Section 22 of the Act, read with Notification SRO 878/1975 dated 29.09.1975, and it was not necessary for the claimant to comply with the procedure contemplated under Section 5 of the Act, read with Rule 10 of the Rules. The referring bench felt that the decision of the earlier Full Bench in Abdurahiman's case (Supra) required to be clarified in its application to cases where the detention of the vehicle was for reasons other than non-payment of tax under the Act.

2. Before we consider the views expressed in the Full Bench decisions referred to above, it would be apposite to notice the relevant statutory provisions in the Act and the Rules, as also the terms of Notification SRO 878/1975 dated 29.09.1975. They read as follows:

The Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976

"3. Levy of tax:-(i) Subject to the provisions of this Act, on and from the date of commencement of this Act, a tax shall be levied on every motor vehicle used or kept for use in the State, at the rate specified for such vehicle in the Schedule:

Provided that no such tax shall be levied on a motor vehicle kept by a dealer in, or a manufacturer of, such vehicle, for the purpose of trade and used under the authorization of a trade certificate granted by the registering authority:

["Provided further that in respect of a new motor vehicle of any of the classes specified in items 1 2, 6, 7(i)(b), 7(i)(c), io(iii) and ii(i) of the Schedule, there shall be levied, from the date of purchase of the vehicle, one time tax at the rate specified in Annexure I, at the time of first registration of the vehicle and thereafter tax shall be levied at the time of renewal of registration of such vehicle or on the expiry of the life time tax already paid at the rate specified in the Schedule as per fourth proviso to sub-section (1) of section 4.]

[Provided also that in respect of old motor cycles specified in item (1), old three wheelers specified in item (2), and old motor cars specified in item ii(i) of the schedule, there shall be levied a tax in advance for a period of five years after the expiry of the period in respect of which tax has been paid at the rate specified in Annexure II and for new goods carriages specified in item (3) (i) (a) to (3) (i) (e) and (3) (ii) (a) to (3) (ii) (e), new autorikshas specified in item 7 (i) (a), there shall be levied a tax in advance