Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
⏳ Remaining Time: 4d 18h 2m 54s
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
2024 (11) TMI 1206 - HC - GSTValidity of exemption notification dated 02.03.2023 - imposition of condition for the purpose of getting exemption that the vehicle in question must have been purchased in the State of Uttar Pradesh - Section-3 of the U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act 1997 - HELD THAT - Perusal of the provisions of section 3 would reveal that the State Government subject to such conditions and for such period as may be specified may exempt either wholly or partly any motor vehicle or class of motor vehicles from the payment of any tax under the Act. The Section does not restrict the power of the State to indicate the conditions for grant of exemption. The notification dated 02.03.2023 inter alia provides for 100% exemption of tax qua the vehicles purchased and registered in Uttar Pradesh. The very fact that the aforesaid Section does not restrict the powers of the State in imposing condition the plea raised seeking to question the condition imposed regarding purchase of vehicle cannot be countenanced. The submissions made that as the tax imposed is on plying of the vehicle no condition on the basis of place of the purchase of the vehicle can be imposed apparently also has no basis. There is substance in the submissions of learned counsel for the respondents that on purchase of vehicle within the State the State gets revenue through its share of G.S.T. and in case the vehicle is purchased from outside the State even that part of the revenue is lost and therefore instead of making it open-ended exemption the State is well within its power to impose the condition of purchase of vehicle within the State which condition cannot be said to be unreasonable. Thus no case for interference is made out in the petition the same is therefore dismissed.
|