Abhilash Saini vs. The State Of Telangana
Held
The Court found that the respondents had not disputed the petitioner's submissions regarding the incorrect calculation of life tax. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's claim that the tax was collected on the ex-showroom price instead of the cost of the vehicle, contrary to the Circular Memo No. 2045/S/2016 dated 03.12.2019 and the Division Bench order in Writ Appeal No. 805 of 2018. The Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondents. The respondents were directed to consider this representation in terms of the aforementioned Circular Memo and the Division Bench order within four weeks of its submission. The ratio decidendi is that tax authorities must adhere to their own circulars and binding court orders when calculating taxes, and where there is a discrepancy, a fresh representation should be considered.
Facts
The petitioner, Abhilash Saini, purchased a Honda City vehicle for Rs. 9,96,900/- (ex-showroom price). He paid life tax at 14% on this ex-showroom price, amounting to Rs. 43,314/-. However, the petitioner contends that the life tax should have been calculated on the cost of the vehicle, which was Rs. 6,87,517/-. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents on 17.11.2022, seeking a refund of the excess tax paid, citing a Circular Memo No. 2045/S/2016 dated 03.12.2019 and a Division Bench order in Writ Appeal No. 805 of 2018. The respondents had not considered this representation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the respondents illegally and arbitrarily collected 14% life tax on the ex-showroom price of Rs. 9,96,900/- instead of the cost of the vehicle, Rs. 6,87,517/-, thereby violating Articles 14, 19, 265, and 300-A of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the respondents failed to follow Circular Memo No. 2045/S/2016 dated 03.12.2019, which directed the collection of life tax on the net invoice price, as per the orders of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 805 of 2018. Consequently, the petitioner claimed to have paid excess CGST, SGST, and cess, and is entitled to a refund. Respondents' Arguments: The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport did not dispute the submissions made by the petitioner.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT T,fIE HOM)IJRABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITIOi'I NO: 19930 0F 2023 [ 32e6 ] .....PETITIONER Abhilash,Saini, S/o. Rajendher, Aged alout 25 years, Occ ; Software Employee, R/o.1-56/1 , Chendoli, Gollapally, Jagtial, Telangana - 505532. Between: AND 1 . The State of Telangana, Represented by its principal Secretary Transport Department, Secretariat buildlng, Hyderabad, T.S. Z. fnq Commissioner, Transport Department Government of Telangana, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Transport Bhavan, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, T.S. -
The.Registering_Authority, Regional Transport Authority of Jagtial Thatipally Jagtial District, T.S. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order, Writ or Order or Direction, particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in collecting 1 4 percentage life tax on ex-showroom price i.e.Rs.9,96,9001(Nine Lakhs Ninety Six T
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.