AIR 1991 (NOC) 40 (KAR) ::(1991) 2 HinduLR 64 ::(1991) 1 CurCC 212 ::ILR (1990) KAR 2718

Karnataka High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. Mohan , C.J. AND M. Ramakrishna , J

(A) Motor Vehicles Act (4 of 1939) , S.2(18A), S.2(25)— Motor Vehicles Rules (1989) , R.30— Constitution of India , Art.14, Art.246(2), Art.254, Sch.VII List III Entry 35— Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation (Amendment) Act (14 of 1989) , S.7— Taxation on Motor Vehicles - Unit of taxation based on seating capacity in relation to omni buses and private service rules - Govt. changing unit of taxation in respect of these vehicles to floor area - It does not amount to discrimination. It is a well settled law that in matters of taxation, the legislature has wide discretion to choose the objects of taxation. Equally, it is well settled that in order to tax something, the State need not tax everything. Where therefore the State has adopted a different basis viz., the floor area for omni buses and private service vehicles, it would not constitute discrimination. May be, the motor vehicles constitute genesis. But, even if one method of taxation is adopted, that by-itself does not bring about discrimination.(Para 20) No doubt, originally the unit of taxation was based on seating capacity in relation to omni buses as well as private service vehicles. The Motor Vehicles Taxation Act itself has classified the mechanically propelled vehicles into various categories. Therefore, it is open to the State to adopt different basis of Taxation for di....