IMPORTANT POINT
Tax liability exists for the period before vehicle seizure, and exemption claims must comply with statutory procedures.

JUDGMENT :

(P.M. MANOJ, J.)

The writ petition is preferred as being aggrieved by the issuance of Ext.P2 memo, whereby it is directed to remit Rs.22,000/- towards the tax due in respect of a vehicle bearing registration No.KL-13/N-2151 for the period between 01.10.2011 and 31.03.2014.

2. It is stated by the petitioner that he is the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No. No.KL-13/N-2151. The vehicle was seized on 27.01.2012 by the Sub Inspector of Police, Shornur, for unlawful transportation of river sand and a fine of Rs.1,20,000/- was imposed on the petitioner by the District Collector vide order dated 04.06.2013. Since the petitioner was not in a position to remit the amount, the vehicle was confiscated, and the proceedings were pending. The vehicle was under the custody of the Shornur Police Station compound since 27.01.2012. Thereby it is contended that the vehicle was not used on the road by the petitioner.

3. Even then Ext.P2 memo is issued with respect to payment of tax between 01.10.2011 to 31.03.2014. It is contended by the petitioner that the said demand raised by the 3rd respondent is arbitrary and illegal. It is further contended that Form G under Section 5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act could not be filed by the petitioner, as the vehicle was in the control and possession of the District Collector and Police. It could be filed only if the petitioner is in possession and control of the vehicle.

4. In response to that the learned Government Pleader submitted that the vehicle was seized only on 27.01.2012. However, the tax arrears shown in Ext.P2 are from 01.10.2011. Hence, the prayer sought by the petitioner for exemption of tax for the entire period cannot be waived off and he is liable to pay the tax from 01.10.2011 to 27.01.2012, in which he was in perfect custody of the vehicle, as the vehicle was seized only on 27.01.2012 by the Police for unlawful transportation of river sand.

5. I have heard Sri.P.Jayaram, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sayed M.Thangal, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

6. On considering the facts involved in this case, it appears that the issue is covered to a great extent as per the reported decision in Jomon M. Arackal v. Tahsildar, Muvattupuzha Taluk and others [2015 (1) KLT 163 (L.B.) = 2015 (1) KHC 1], The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted here under:-

"In the light of the above discussion, it can be seen that there is, in fact, no conflict between the views taken by the Full Bench in Abdurahiman's case (Supra) and the referring Full Bench in Jomon's case (Supra), inasmuch as while the former bench was concerned with cases where the detention of the vehicle in police custody was for non-payment of tax under the Act, the latter bench was concerned with a case where the detention of the vehicle in police custody was for an offence other than nonpayment of tax under the Act. We do not, however, agree with the observations of the Full Bench in Jomon's case (Supra), that would suggest that even in a case where the vehicle is in police custody for non-payment of tax due under the Act, the person claiming exemption need not follow the procedure of filing Form G as it would be impossible of performance. We are of the view that the provisions granting exemption in a taxing statute have to be strictly construed and, if a person is not able to comply with the statutory conditions for claiming exemption from tax, it is a clear indication of the fact that the statute never intended to grant an exemption in such cases. We, therefore, answer the reference in the following manner;

(i) In cases where the vehicle is held in the custody of the police or other authorities for non-payment of tax due under the Act, a claim for exemption from payment of tax for the period during which the vehicle is in such custody can be made only in terms of Section 5 of the Act, read with Rule 10 of the Rules. In such cases, the claim for exemption will have to b