High Court Karnataka High Court

Karnataka State Road Transport … vs Joint Commissioner Mangalore … on 20 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Karnataka State Road Transport … vs Joint Commissioner Mangalore … on 20 September, 2010
Author: H N Das
1N THE HIGH COURT 0}? K_AR.NATAKA AT BTANGQ-Q'R%E

D.ATEIZ> THIS THE 20% DAY OF SEPTEMBER,    ~

BEFORE 

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ELN.é1'JAGAMQi«igX1§:D.}§S  A

W.P.8938/200E§L'L'(:'L:3wTAXS"*  1  
BETWEEN: . '  .

KARNATAKA STATE' ROADi1'RA§"ESE>-Q.I%T  .,  " "
CORPORATIQN;'"j.._     
 -       .
REPRESENTED B?f IfI'S IEIVISEQNAI..£;iOI'{"§ROLLER
BEIALIVE/mj._§_:0.MIv11$§é;i::N§:£Ai..éK.¥:I
 LA:B'AQ;z.."Mgx;%\;GA:i4c>R:at.

2." *'xf_:t?§;E: cjomsgj.:§s:c>:~«sE1{
MAN(§AI;C§RIi 'ma 1-:ANAc;_A RA PALIKIEZ

V  IA.A1ij'3AC}}-I, %\/E/'£\3GAI.)('_7R1':?. .RESPONDENTS

V’ s.v1sIa£wAm’H SHET’1*Y, ADV), FOR R-1 & R-2)

THIS XVRTI’ Pf5jT’I’i1″Z{ON I*”§E,;IiI§.T1 ‘[,)I«-“‘A 226 ES: 227 OF

u h?CIONS’IT§’Uf1ON OF INIHA I-‘RAY’I.2’\1C} TC) {ZU’ASI;{ THE ][JD(§1’vIEN’1”

I}’1’.26.G2.2OG8 M.A.E\§<).48s'2()O7 ON "I"}-iii FELIEZ OF 1%'

/'
/ 5;

ADDI”I’IONA.I., §_)1STR.i’C’.”J’f ;tIiDt;z:, DAKSHINA KANNADA AT
?v1ANGAfL.OR]%; (1>RQ1:>tJt:1’~:D E-I}€iR1%1″\?’v”1’I’}:i AS ANNE}t”[.fREL«A)-
ETC’.. M I

This petition c0m:%.r::g on for hearing this d;3}3—, *

made the followmgg

eQWMEW£Qm.,££.:13

In this writ petition the petitioeef«hats.prayed.”.tfQi*’éxavfit’in ‘

the nature of Certiorari to quash t}tLe’v..ef1d.Qrsett1e-at Tdeteflg 3.9.2007

issued by the first respe_Iit;1e11t._ast)e1tfAi1~n_exure~B and the

judgment dated :6.2.2008″:’;§essed by the I

Add1.t>is;m ‘ju.a1g”e», Kanttada.

2. “V–s1″eti.tid:1ef’.–e.””*Rea& Tzransport Corporation under

.. _ Sectidtl 3 the Rczzmi ‘1″taI1sp0rtatii1.,;_3«h<§ issued the impugned endorsement: at Anr1exurewB

" _ '}Aet¥"y–£.T2g taxes on coxnmercial basis on the ground that petitioner is

""'L–1'si371g the premises in <:§1esti0I3. fer commercial pilrpese.

.-€""5"'"

2/
xff
1/

Aggrieveé by this order of first I€3SpOI]d8TE'[i at t–‘*X§1I’1€}V{:’E.13fié'”B,

petitioner filed an appeai before the District ]L1Cie’.§§o’\’%:-t

Kannada in ?Vi.A.4852007 and the same”Ca:zte to be4idisti1isise–d}as»..

per Annexure–A. Hence this writ petition.

3. Hearé arguments on the Side the

entire writ papers.

4. It iS_:I!1Q_[ inféispute _it’i1é:t__ petitioner is using the
premises iii-qu_est.io1i’: é::s’=goé.ovtzn ati’c}vfot”irepai:i11g their buses. The

activity (5f’S’E1Ol’iIi1z<g.EiTt'i3.Vii'1{i:E€1fi%:E"iS'ialld repairing of buses is reiateé to

carrying on tiie.iti1iia.in bii.si1r:'ess of operating buses. Therefore, the

iip1.'€I.1Vi1"i€€S:"'i'i'1i':"'. Question is used for commercial purpose. Section

iii .o§'vtihe_ ]$L:i'rvt.it1tak.a .i.V[u§1iCip3i Corporatioréts Act specifies as

11§}dé'f':

2 V. i ‘T ‘Section I100) ~ btzjfdjkzgs or faizztzis belonging to the Centre]

(?§)Ve}’131I2e*I;zz” 01′ 5212}; .53;/:2r’e Clbverzrzrzenz’ tzsea’ for pzxrposes of

” “‘&’overn1z2enI and not usea’ or fizberzcfed {U be used flair ;”esz’c2’e12z’:’.;2! or

CO1???EIIQICTIQIpZ1I'[){i}£(:’5′ ”

5. ‘When a premises is used far :_c3:;.ide;it-Lil’ t}1*.
commercial p:.1r§)c>ses UEETI the sgme is .1′;’.'(I’L’ »eXem.pted’ fir-oitn Ievyings

the property tax. Therefore. {he impL1g,?ned’-(}fders .I<2.vyin,ga th-é't.éa$.*'~

on the petit:i011e2i in respect of"=:}§'e;. premi'3.es"'Ai.11?qiigstion on
commercial basis is in '_a'<:c0rd_:énceVA 'w._i:.1.1L"~«].aw and I find no
justifiable ground to inteArfl?.rVé_ with L.he"Acc0rding1y, the

writ petition is ijereibj/._sdisfi1isse§1.

:0 ms