Court allows installment payment for tax arrears under conditions despite past defaults, promoting fairness in tax collection.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner, who is a registered owner of a goods carriage bearing Registration No.KL-

45R-4433, seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing Exhibit.P10 proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent without hearing the petitioner and without affording him with an opportunity of being heard.

(ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 1^st respondent to permit the petitioner to pay Motor Vehicle Tax arrears for the Vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-45R-4433 by providing the benefit of Exhibit.P8 notification providing the benefit for settlement of tax arrears w.e.f 01.04.2020 onwards And (iii) To pass such other orders or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of Justice.”

2. The basic dispute involved in this writ petition pertains to the demand of motor vehicle tax arrears in respect of the vehicle owned by the petitioner and the immediate reason for filing this writ petition is the rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner to permit him to settle the liability by way of One Time Settlement.

3. In fact, in respect of the vehicle owned by the petitioner, certain motor vehicle tax arrears are there, pertaining to the period from 01.04.2020 to 30.09.2023. Earlier, the petitioner approached the Government seeking an installment facility and as per the order dated 21.07.2023, the petitioner was granted an installment facility to pay the amounts in six installments. However, the petitioner could pay only two installments and the remaining installments were defaulted. Consequently, recovery proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and challenging the same W.P(C) No.12588/2024 was filed. Ext.P6 is the judgment passed in the said writ petition, wherein, this Court granted a further opportunity to settle the liability in six installments. However, the said installment facility was also not availed by the petitioner.

4. Thereafter, this writ petition is submitted as the opportunity sought by the petitioner to settle the liability under One Time Settlement scheme was declined in view of the fact that, as no One Time Settlement scheme was available to the petitioner. When the writ petition came up for consideration, this Court passed an interim order on 07.10.2024 granting stay of recovery proceedings on the condition that, the petitioner shall pay 30% of the amount of tax within a period of two weeks. Even though the petitioner remitted 30% of the said amount, it was only on 24.10.2024, which is after the period fixed by this Court in the interim order dated 07.10.2024. The contentions raised by the petitioner are to be considered in this factual background. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

6. As far as the claim of settlement as per one time settlement scheme is concerned, as of now, there is no scheme available to the petitioner and therefore, it is not possible to entertain such relief. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought further opportunity to settle the liability in instalments.

7. The learned Government Pleader opposed the aforesaid contention by pointing out that, this is a case in which, on two occasions the petitioner was granted the installment facility, but the petitioner did not avail the said opportunities. It was also submitted that, as of now, the total tax liability of the petitioner comes to Rs.4,09,760/- along with interest and other charges.

8. After considering all the relevant aspects, I am of the view that, even though the petitioner failed to avail the installment facility granted on earlier occasions, one more opportunity can be granted to the petitioner,