HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 1361 OF 2023

O R D E R:

Petitioner is stated to have purchased a Black BMW

730LD, 2013 model, bearing registration No. DL 1CQ 4638, for Rs. 9,75,000/- from Quest Experiential Services Ltd. through Kunj Motors in Delhi as reflected in the invoice dated 22-08-2022. Original cost of the vehicle, as per the invoice dated 26-11-2013, was Rs. 92,50,000/-. According to him, one-time tax (OTT) amounting to Rs. 12,48,687/- had already been paid for the vehicle at the time of its purchase in Delhi, valid for the lifetime of the vehicle as per the applicable rules. Upon bringing the vehicle to Hyderabad in September 2022, he is stated to have approached the 2nd respondent with all mandatory documents to effect transfer of ownership. Despite his willingness to pay the requisite charges, the 2^nd respondent demanded Rs. 14,91,150/-. This amount was calculated as 15.5% road tax on the original invoice price of Rs. 92,50,000/-, along with 4% transfer charges.

It is contended, respondent’s demand for road tax on the original invoice price is arbitrary, illegal, and without authority, as the vehicle is already 10-year-old and has significantly depreciated in value. Imposition of life tax on the old vehicle contradicts the provisions of Section 47(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which does not empower the respondents to levy life tax on a previously taxed vehicle. Furthermore, Rule 96 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, also does not authorize such tax imposition.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner Sri L.V. Ramana Rao submits that this Court, in Writ Petition No. 6978 of 2015 vide order dated 18-03-2015, declared such demands as illegal. Therefore, a direction is sought to the 2^nd respondent to transfer the ownership of vehicle to petitioner without demanding life tax or any additional tax.

3. The case of the 2nd respondent, as submitted by learned Government Pleader for Transport, is that sale consideration for the nine-year-old vehicle, originally registered on 26-11-2013, cannot override the invoice price, which forms the basis for life tax calculation. This follows column No. 6 of the Sixth Schedule of G.O.Ms. No. 22, dated 07-05-2022, which mandates tax levied on the cost of the vehicle as per the invoice, adjusted for the vehicle’s age. It is submitted that motor vehicle taxes are State taxes governed independently under the respective State Legislations. Taxes paid in Delhi, even if termed as one-time tax (OTT), do not exempt liability for taxes under Telangana’s jurisdiction. Under Section 3 of the TSMVT Act, 1963, tax is levied on every motor vehicle used or kept for use in the State. Hence, petitioner may seek refund from Delhi authorities for the unutilized OTT period, but the liability to pay life tax in Telangana remains. The respondent clarifies that the stipulated tax must be paid upon issuance of NOC and entry of the vehicle into Telangana.

Learned Government Pleader clarified that all non-

transport category vehicles, including motor cars and jeeps, entering Telangana by address change or ownership transfer, are subject to life tax as per Schedule VI of G.O.Ms.No. 22. The invoice price of Rs.92.50 lacs and vehicle’s age exceeding eight years was considered, along with a penalty of 1% per month on the tax as per Rule 13 of the 1963 Rules. Petitioner’s contention that 4% transfer charges were imposed is refuted. It is submitted that this was a penalty of 1% per month on the payable life tax from the date of ‘NOC’ issuance. The penalty is mandated under Rule 13, item No. 4 of the TSMVT Rules, 1964.

Learned Government Pleader submits that the order in Writ Petition No. 6978 of 2015 is not applicable as the said order pertains to absence of explicit legal provisions in the impugned order of that case, which is not analogous to the present situation. Similarly, references to judgments in W.P. No. 17038 of 2014 and W.A. No. 805 of 2018 are addressed, with the respondent