Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10th February 2015, 12:55   #1156
BHPian
 
prakash_ajp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 494
Thanked: 719 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vigkey View Post
Yes. They are good hunters who know where and how to get hold of their prey.

On a serious note, none of these proves beyond doubt that the vehicle has stayed in Karnataka for over 30 days. Does it? Unfortunately, the sorry state of our law is that the onus is on the victim to prove that he is innocent and not on the lawmakers to prove that the accused is guilty.
I think we first need to clarify the "staying in Karnataka for 30 days". If someone resides in the state and makes weekend trips to his/her hometown in the neighboring state once in a while and produces the toll slips as proof of being outside the state, should you accept that? Should you accept that even when you know this person has been residing and working in Karnataka? If so, why? I certainly don't buy that. In these scenarios, using the toll slips as proof is not entirely honest, is it?

We are talking about the RTO being opportunistic and all, in but in my opinion, so are people. Given a chance, most will try and avoid paying the tax. Now, we are not talking about the rules/law being fair or not, because rules are rules. We can fight it out in the court and change them if we can. But at the moment (leaving out the few innocent ones) it's a fight between two opportunistic people, albeit one being way too strong for the other. And naturally, people will support the underdogs!

All said and done, we should encourage people to keep a copy of the stay order handy and be brave in facing the traffic cops. That's the most important thing, because that way we can also send a strong message to the RTO.
prakash_ajp is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 12:57   #1157
Senior - BHPian
 
humyum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Leicester/Mumbai
Posts: 2,306
Thanked: 2,188 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
Yeah, so just because getting road tax refunds from one state is a problem; so Karnataka should for-go its revenue share. Do you think the state government will allow that to happen. Sir, as per the law the vehicle owner has to pay the prescribed motor vehicle tax in the state. How he gets the money, is his problem. And how he plans to get refund from the previous state is also his problem. Karnataka government I don't think is doing a charity business here.
Baba, getting the road tax back from the KA government is cumbersome too. How will I get the road tax back from the KA government if I don't re register in Karnataka ? And why should I re register if I plan to stay in Karnataka for a maximum year or two.

Are you not getting the point or you are purposely defending your point without seeing a logic ?

As per the Motor vehicles act, owners had to pay the road tax if they stayed more than 11 months, when changed to 1 month is when the Hoopla started.
Secondly the hoopla started when the KA brutes started stopping every other vehicle which was from out of state and started demanding the drivers prove themselves not guilty. How is that?

You are looking at everything from fanatic rule book point of view, some of which were changed just some months back. By doing that, all sense of logic is being avoided specially for a city which has lots of floating population because of its software field.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
I have seen two colleagues (both from Kerala), who are in Bengaluru for nearly 8 years now. One fellow started crying hoarse when his vehicle was caught. The other fellow scooted with his KL car, and did not bring it back. These two folks getting a pretty decent pay, owning apartments in the city did not bother to pa the road tax. May be you will renew it, or you may not. But from what I have seen in the last 35 years, people would dodge any payment due to the government if there is a way to escape. Why do you think government prefers "Tax Deducted at Source" (for salaried folks)? Why does the state government collect motor vehicle tax even before the vehicle is given to the owner? All precisely for the same reason.
IF the KA government knowing very well it has a floating population had kept a renew your road tax every year rule, things would have been different for them as well as for people staying in KA.

I would think twice too if I was asked to pay a 15 year road tax in a state which I know I won't stay for more than a year or two.

You don't assume my stay in the state and I don't overpay for a stay which I won't be doing at the start. Simple. Its like you take care of me, I take care of you kinds.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
Yeah, "common sense" to know that they would not make much money even if they try these. Karnataka government has clearly understood the overwhelming number of non-KA cars freaking out in Bengaluru and other big cities (mainly due to the high IT population). And they decided to collect the motor vehicle tax dues. The same may not work in Kerala, where the number of such vehicles would be miniscule. I am not sure on TN (cities like Chennai etc.).
That is what is the actual thuggery which people have filed petitions and are fighting for. You find logic in that too, now that itself is hilarious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ::CMS:: View Post

I am not here to educate anyone, take it or leave it. It seems you are in a dream land of "Republic of Karnataka" which is out of India and as you believe its noway related to Indian central MV act. But there are people still believe central MV act as the mother deed and karnataka got the provision to enjoy the tax which is the sub act of central MV act moreover the constitution of India is applicable for any act / law in India by default, it doesnt have to explicitly mention in each and every document.
You know the highlighted part is actually the 'REAL PROBLEM'. "Bangalore was this beauty that beauty so many years back, now with so much influx of population and cars, look what it has become, look at the traffic in our beloved city bla bla"

Sorry guys, how much ever you try to keep the above mentioned point out of the debate, it has to come for the simple reason it is one of the major causes for the government and the police officers who catch and act like thugs to behave this way.
humyum is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 10th February 2015, 13:03   #1158
BHPian
 
raghu.t.k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chennai
Posts: 446
Thanked: 161 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
The tax refund would never be the same amount. There is a clear cut formula on how tax refunds are calculated. It gets pro-rated and reduced year on year. So if the vehicle gets transferred say after two years, don't expect the same amount you paid as LTT to be given back to you.
.....
Having gone through the thread and your various responses I agree you are right from a legal perspective. I dont think its so harsh in Kerala or TN. To some extent, they are strict in Hyd aswell, mainly in Gachibowli. Also on my various visits to Thrissur and Palakkad, I have never been stopped while driving a TN or AP vehicle.

I do agree that the state in which the vehicles ply should pay a fair share of the applicable local taxes. Unfortunately the issue here is "fair share" and "applicable". It should be the Govts endeavour to have an intergrated system of various RTOs for transfer of funds under various categories. Then the motorists can go to their respective RTOs and pay any diffential taxes for the expected period of stay or a min period of time. Once moved out, the next RTO can adjust any difference. After all we are paying the Govt(yeah agreed its the state). Just have a look at the ways various banks exchange funds as part of its settlement process, that should be a good model for these guys. If that is the case I am sure the majority here would quietly pay it up and continue with life. In this day and age, with the wealth of knowledge in various Information systems, we should have this easily. Extending the pipe dream further, if this could be enabled online, most of us could pay it sitting in our office with our cards and then file the receipt with the authority for the records. Dont we now file our tax returns online, and send the ack ?

So while legally correct, its no easy task. Especially being stranded in an unknown place when your vehicle is taken away. When I was in NCR, I bought an Alto, and had to sell the same within a year(losing a lot of money), since I was moving to Hyd. Initially at Hyd, either used the unsafe Autos, or car pooled with my friends when possible. Then decided to get a AStar for my local drive, while my SX4 was idling in chennai. Now that I have moved back to chennai with the AStar, I know the trouble of getting the vehicle re-registered in Chennai. I had to take 2 days off, even after engaging a broker to help things.

Last edited by raghu.t.k : 10th February 2015 at 13:07.
raghu.t.k is online now   (2) Thanks
Old 10th February 2015, 13:27   #1159
BHPian
 
BIBIN004's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: KL-31/KL-01
Posts: 108
Thanked: 190 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

It looks like the Kormanagla RTO have collected tax from one of the techies while there was a stay from Karnataka High Court pending on the case. It's sad to see officers violating High Court rules as well.

http://news.syne.com/index.php/karna...empt-of-court/

Last edited by BIBIN004 : 10th February 2015 at 13:30.
BIBIN004 is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 13:47   #1160
BHPian
 
neutralgrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 75
Thanked: 16 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

The link says that this incident had happened on 14 Nov.
But 8 weeks from November would mean that the stay would be not applicable right now. Am I missing something here?
neutralgrey is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 13:55   #1161
BHPian
 
Ajitsingh208's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Pune
Posts: 209
Thanked: 101 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by neutralgrey View Post
The link says that this incident had happened on 14 Nov.
But 8 weeks from November would mean that the stay would be not applicable right now. Am I missing something here?
The initial stay was granted on a case filed by a businessman against impounding of his car, that was in Nov. This news was not made public then but only came out in papers in end Dec. Since no one except the RTO knew about this Stay Order they continued their drive thereby violating the Stay order.

By that time Waseem & others members of the FB Group had also filed a petition which came up for hearing in Jan, in which the state counsel gave an undertaking that no LTT would be collected until the next hearing at least.

So there are 2 petitions being heard by KA HC as of now.
Ajitsingh208 is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 10th February 2015, 14:08   #1162
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,142
Thanked: 683 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by ::CMS::
If you know the MV act the RTO them selves are doing illegal money collection if its without NOC from another state so that they dont have to refund the money back. Thats why people call them money sucking leeches.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I know the MV Act by heart. So can you guide me which sections in MV Act talks about "money collection"? The Motor Vehicle taxes are collected by a different state specific act.

Quote:
I am not here to educate anyone, take it or leave it. It seems you are in a dream land of "Republic of Karnataka" which is out of India and as you believe its noway related to Indian central MV act. But there are people still believe central MV act as the mother deed and karnataka got the provision to enjoy the tax which is the sub act of central MV act moreover the constitution of India is applicable for any act / law in India by default, it doesnt have to explicitly mention in each and every document.
Sorry for being so blunt. You yourself do not seem to have any clue on MV Act (the so called "mother deed"), and the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, and the constitution. If people believe Central MV Act of 1988 as the "mother deed" (!?), then can't they guide me to the appropriate section? Also how can you consider MV Act of 1988 to be superseding (or controlling) the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Act, which was first passed as law way back in 1957? Constitution is supreme, and any Act which is unconstitutional can be chucked out by the courts. So if it has provisions against freedoms guaranteed under the constitution, then how come the act is still in force?

I have been asking for some legal information, and other than a few mumbo jumbo words of "Mother deed", MV Act superseding/controlling the state specific act for taxation of motor vehicles, no body seems to have any clue. Now my only hope would be on Silverwood who is actually working on the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lin-jo
I myself am not from this state, I bought my vehicle in KA and registered it here. Now imagine if other states implement the same rule, then I cannot drive down to my home town. I have to carry ID proof and nativity proof and passports!!
Even the so called draconian Karnataka government allowed one month grace period to pay up. So the point you raise, is not actually a big problem at the moment. And any way as per MV Act DL (which is also your identity proof) has to be carried in original.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prakash_ajp
If someone resides in the state and makes weekend trips to his/her hometown in the neighboring state once in a while and produces the toll slips as proof of being outside the state, should you accept that? Should you accept that even when you know this person has been residing and working in Karnataka? If so, why? I certainly don't buy that. In these scenarios, using the toll slips as proof is not entirely honest, is it?
Agreed. For the same reason RTOs are also not fools . A genuine tourist or one-time visitor would be able to get away by showing the toll receipts. RTO folks jolly well know that many people who live in border areas of Bengaluru city can make quick trips to Hosur, and get a toll receipt. If you notice the RTO squads had precise information on where to wait and ambush the vehicle owners. They did it in front of IT Companies, and big apartments. And that too at the right time of coming or leaving office. Such people would find it tough to prove that they are just short term visitors to the city. RTO also collected parking stickers etc., to prove their point.

Quote:
We are talking about the RTO being opportunistic and all, in but in my opinion, so are people. Given a chance, most will try and avoid paying the tax. Now, we are not talking about the rules/law being fair or not, because rules are rules.
You pretty much echo my sentiments. I have been Bangalore for nearly 15+ years. I am yet to see any individual who willingly paid the Karnataka Road Tax. And I am talking about people, who are not poor. Folks have paid 50-60 lakhs for apartments with all those funny UK/British style names. But when it comes to vehicle taxes, it is time to "act poor", play the victim and try escaping.

Quote:
Originally Posted by humyum
How will I get the road tax back from the KA government if I don't re register in Karnataka ? And why should I re register if I plan to stay in Karnataka for a maximum year or two.
What proof will Karnataka Govt. have, when you go and tell them that your are leaving the state and need a tax refund. They are not fools to believe what ever a person says, and just give the money and say good bye. So registering your vehicle in Karnataka is a way for you to later claim refund. The state is happy if the road tax comes in. So if you plan to ask for tax refunds, plan to re-register your vehicle. Or check with RTO (use RTI if required), to figure out what other letters/documents can prove that you are moving out of the state.

Quote:
As per the Motor vehicles act, owners had to pay the road tax if they stayed more than 11 months, when changed to 1 month is when the Hoopla started.
Can you please let me know the section which mentions this? Sec. 47 M.V Act talks about re-registering the vehicle if a vehicle stays in a different state for more than 12 months. That section does not have any thing mentioned about road tax collection. Please click on the link to get the actual English explanation of Sec 47 MV Act, and let me know where it talks about road tax collection.

Every body is quoting the MV Act, and the Constitution - but no specifics. So are we wildly speculating on the provisions?

Quote:
By doing that, all sense of logic is being avoided specially for a city which has lots of floating population because of its software field.
Did Karnataka government force any to join the software field and land up in Bengaluru?? No, am I right. People came in by their own free will, liking the place. So now they are all here, how about paying the tax dues as well? Or is Bengaluru some kind of tourist spot where people come, litter the place and move on?

Quote:
IF the KA government knowing very well it has a floating population had kept a renew your road tax every year rule, things would have been different for them as well as for people staying in KA.
The whole scheme of Life Time Tax is not unique to Karnataka. Every state now works on the basis of LTT, because of its easiness to collect. And there are provisions to get back the tax in case of moving out of the state. Why should Karnataka alone bend over backwards to have a unique "One year payment" scheme, which they would find tough to implement? The people who I mentioned were staying in Bengaluru for 8 years. A person staying for 8 years did not bother to pay the LTT, until the RTO came knocking home. Fat chance such people would pay, if they are given chances to make yearly payments.

Quote:
Simple. Its like you take care of me, I take care of you kinds.
Karnataka government or its RTO are not the in-laws of any citizen in Karnataka. It may be these kind of attitude which made the RTO crack its whip, and go ahead with the tax due collection, with a vengeance. And that left many an IT employee who had these attitude problems standing on the road, wondering what next to do.

Quote:
That is what is the actual thuggery which people have filed petitions and are fighting for.
How can collecting tax dues become a thuggery, my friend?

Quote:
Originally Posted by raghu.t.k
To some extent, they are strict in Hyd aswell, mainly in Gachibowli.
There is a specific reason to this. Again it is mainly IT companies, pretty much every one has a car (or two) and generally are not bothered on taxes etc. And the government knows that this group (IT folks) have much more disposable income than the others, and can pay up the tax if pushed hard.

On the automation part, the proposed National Road Safety Bill (it is still not an Act by the Parliament) has plans for such schemes. The new bill considers the technological advances and are reformulating many processes. But with the current low numbers in Rajya Sabha, Modi & co are finding it hard to push any new legislation.
sachinpk is offline   (2) Thanks
Old 10th February 2015, 14:12   #1163
Senior - BHPian
 
Captain Slow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,256
Thanked: 650 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post


Yeah, "common sense" to know that they would not make much money even if they try these. Karnataka government has clearly understood the overwhelming number of non-KA cars freaking out in Bengaluru and other big cities (mainly due to the high IT population). And they decided to collect the motor vehicle tax dues. The same may not work in Kerala, where the number of such vehicles would be miniscule. I am not sure on TN (cities like Chennai etc.).
Why do you see everything as Karnataka first ? Shouldn't it be Indian First ?
When someone has already legally paid the tax to the Government why should he be forced to pay another round of taxes?

Lets not compare income tax with road. Road tax is paid by everyone buying a motor vehicle irrespective of the state where the vehicle is brought.

I have seen so many BBMP Transport vehicles/Road Repair Vechiles, Tractors, Road Rollers, Grinders with MH,TN, AP Registrations. How come non of these are ever fined or caught by the RTO?

If the Government is so worried about losing money in road tax why not simplify the system -
When an owner Transfers from 1 state to another let him sign a document asking the current government to take the road tax money from the original state. If any Difference in amount is there the owner will have to pay for this.
Also the tax should be calculated on the current value of the vehicle and not on the original value.
Captain Slow is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 14:22   #1164
Senior - BHPian
 
theexperthand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,369
Thanked: 1,136 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post

I do agree that the the 1 month rule was precisely for the RTOs to crack down on non-KA vehicles. But it is very tough to prove that a person has been staying in Bengaluru for more than 6 months.
Our justice system upholds the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.

The right to silence has various facets. One is that the burden is on
the State or rather the prosecution to prove that the accused is guilty.
Another is that an accused is presumed to be innocent till he is proved to be
guilty. A third is the right of the accused against self incrimination, namely,
the right to be silent and that he cannot be compelled to incriminate himself.


Source

I am not sure if you have heard about this. The onus is on the authority to prove that the accused is guilty, not vice versa. Here, in Karnataka RTOs case, it is opposite - they will seize first and the onus is on the accused to prove that he is NOT guilty. So, are they (RTO) above and beyond Indian Law System?

Quote:

Practical difficulties in implementation.
1. The first notice gets served by one officer, what guarantee is that he would detect the second offence as well? Karnataka RTO does not have the black-berry based system which Bengaluru Traffic Police has. So tracking repeat violation is going to be a problem.
The Karnataka RTO do not have Blackberry because it was not funded by the government. Now, how can this be an excuse to not uphold the law? If a government body do not have sufficient means to enforce the law, does it give the liberty to the government body to bend the law at its will? If RTO have a problem of tracking repeated violations, they should have appealed to the government to provide sufficient infrastructure.

Quote:
Taxes are levied not based on any provision in MV Act. That is different, as it is based on a state specific law. The requirement of changing registration is a requirement as per M.V Act. I don't think we can club the two provisions (of two separate laws).
Now, this one takes the cake. So, as per you, while collecting, we can't club the two laws, but if one wants to claim back, the two laws can be clubbed together?
So, for paying tax, you cant club the laws and can't make it mandatory that the payee have to provide an NOC or need to re-register, but if the payee wants to reclaim the paid tax, it is mandatory that he have to re-register?

Quote:
Originally Posted by humyum View Post

Are you not getting the point or you are purposely defending your point without seeing a logic ?
You are not alone in this doubt, my friend. I remember an old saying "You can wake up a sleeping person, but you can't wake up some one who is pretending to sleep".

--Anoop

Last edited by theexperthand : 10th February 2015 at 14:24.
theexperthand is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 14:22   #1165
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Gurgaon
Posts: 161
Thanked: 177 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by prakash_ajp View Post

We are talking about the RTO being opportunistic and all, in but in my opinion, so are people. Given a chance, most will try and avoid paying the tax.
I think it's a poor argument. Government is not for opportunism and petty extortions. It is to stop that.
atnyia is online now  
Old 10th February 2015, 14:24   #1166
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,142
Thanked: 683 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Slow
Why do you see everything as Karnataka first ? Shouldn't it be Indian First ?
Sir, to be honest. I am not a Kannadiga. I am a migrant like many of the others out here. I have had four vehicles after I moved here (15 odd years back). First one was a scooter which KL registered. I was caught multiple times, and decided to avoid paying fines mainly for the tax payment part. I had all other documents in place. I paid up the road tax, and got the receipts. I did not re-register the vehicle. The vehicle after 6 more years of stellar service in Bengaluru went back to Kerala. The matter here is not of being a Kannadiga first or Indian first. "Indian First" cannot be an excuse to avoid paying taxes to the Karnataka state government. In that case we are mis-utilising patriotism to avoid paying dues to a state which is also part of India.

Quote:
When someone has already legally paid the tax to the Government why should he be forced to pay another round of taxes?
Both the governments are different. Motor Vehicle Taxes are collected by individual states and they have wide privileges on that. So a tax paid to "Kerala Government" cannot be considered as paying the "Karnataka Government" as well. There is no revenue sharing mechanisms in place.

Quote:
When an owner Transfers from 1 state to another let him sign a document asking the current government to take the road tax money from the original state. If any Difference in amount is there the owner will have to pay for this.
If this is automated and done in real-time (like online bank transfers), it is doable. Considering the achievements we have in IT, it is doable. But if it is not online and done quickly, it would have problems:-
1. The owner happily signs a documents asking KA state to get money from KL state, and leaves the place with the "tax paid" receipts. It would take one week minimum for KL to respond. What if KL states that this fellow had not paid enough taxes in KL, or the vehicle itself has too many cases pending on it?
2. Or KL informs that they would only pay nnn amount, and the balance has to be collected from the owner of the vehicle. Now it becomes KA state government's responsibility to track down the vehicle owner and demand payments from him. Huge waste of time and efforts.

So considering the limitations, the governments (across India) came up with a strategy. Let the onus of paying taxes (and working to get tax dues), be the responsibility of the vehicle owner. Since this effects him the most, let him do the ground work as well. A very harsh way to see things, but in the old world of letters, physical files and dusty little office rooms, this was the easier way out.
sachinpk is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 14:29   #1167
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,966
Thanked: 1,425 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
Also how can you consider MV Act of 1988 to be superseding (or controlling) the Karnataka Motor Vehicle Act, which was first passed as law way back in 1957?
That is easy to answer. If you look at the Constitution of India, you will find that "Mechanically propelled vehicles including the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied" is included in the concurrent list (schedule 7). Items in the concurrent list can be legislated and regulated by both the union and state governments, but if the union government has legislated on such an item, then it prevails over the state legislation irrespective of the relative chronological order of such legislations. So it does not matter when the MV Act or the KA MV Taxation Act were legislated, if there are contradictory provisions then the union act prevails. In fact the judge commented (as seen in the press) that the KA MV Taxation amendment appears to be ultra vires (to the MV Act, presumably).

The way out of this situation for KA government was to have the President of India (instead of the Governor of Karnataka) sign the amendment act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
Constitution is supreme, and any Act which is unconstitutional can be chucked out by the courts. So if it has provisions against freedoms guaranteed under the constitution, then how come the act is still in force?
Courts don't chuck laws out on their own. Laws need to be challenged in the court for them to be ruled upon. This is such a challenge.
binand is online now   (1) Thanks
Old 10th February 2015, 14:38   #1168
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,142
Thanked: 683 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by theexperthand
Our justice system upholds the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.
That is the very basics of Indian judiciary, and I am aware of it as well.

Quote:
The onus is on the authority to prove that the accused is guilty, not vice versa. Here, in Karnataka RTOs case, it is opposite - they will seize first and the onus is on the accused to prove that he is NOT guilty.
The RTO has also been collecting evidence which includes parking stickers and company stickers etc. The vehicles are seized, because there is no other way the accused is forced to respond. Serving a notice and hoping for the vehicle's owner to land up is like waiting for donkey's years. His vehicle is any way having a non-KA registration (tough to track the owner who may be in another state), he himself does not have any other documents which KA government can seize.

Please refer to Sec 11 and Sec 11.A which gives the powers for the RTO to seize the vehicle then and there. If the owner does not pay up in 30 days, or contests and wins his case the vehicle can be sold off.

A question I have is, the people who have filed the case in Hon.HC, are they focusing on the tax collection itself or against the RTO in using strong arm tactics to collect the taxes?

Quote:
So, as per you, while collecting, we can't club the two laws, but if one wants to claim back, the two laws can be clubbed together?
Who is talking about the clubbing the laws? People say M.V Act has provisions to collect Motor Vehicle tax. For the past 48 hours, I have been asking for that section which explicitly says that. No one has responded with that information. Taxes can be collected (as per the state Act), without waiting for vehicle re-registration. But when refunds are being asked, the state has every right for proof to show that the person is leaving the state. Currently that proof can only be the NOC request - which proves that the person wishes to move out of the state. Please file an RTI to find out if there are other documents which can be used in lieu of NOC. Did you get the difference? A lay man's example. I buy a few things from you, and pay money. Are you really bothered about what I feel, or how I got the money, as long as you are paid? Now for some reason I come and ask you the money back. Will you just believe me, and return the money? You would ask for the reasons and confirmations, right? For RTO that confirmation is the NOC request.
sachinpk is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 14:44   #1169
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,142
Thanked: 683 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by binand
That is easy to answer. If you look at the Constitution of India, you will find that "Mechanically propelled vehicles including the principles on which taxes on such vehicles are to be levied" is included in the concurrent list (schedule 7).
Excellent, this is the sort of information I was asking for.

Quote:
So it does not matter when the MV Act or the KA MV Taxation Act were legislated, if there are contradictory provisions then the union act prevails.
Agreed completely. Now the next question is does MV Act have any provision which talks about taxation? I have checked the Act (online) multiple times. I have not found any specific provision. Can you help me on this part please? Or is there a Central MV Taxation Act, which supersedes the state level legislation?

Quote:
The way out of this situation for KA government was to have the President of India (instead of the Governor of Karnataka) sign the amendment act.
This was only required if MV Act (or any other Central Govt. Act) had provisions on vehicle taxation, am I right? If it is a state specific law, and the amendment did not have any impact on any other pan-India act, it need not go to the President for approval?
sachinpk is offline  
Old 10th February 2015, 15:03   #1170
Senior - BHPian
 
theexperthand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,369
Thanked: 1,136 Times
Default re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
That is the very basics of Indian judiciary, and I am aware of it as well.

The RTO has also been collecting evidence which includes parking stickers and company stickers etc. The vehicles are seized, because there is no other way the accused is forced to respond. Serving a notice and hoping for the vehicle's owner to land up is like waiting for donkey's years. His vehicle is any way having a non-KA registration (tough to track the owner who may be in another state), he himself does not have any other documents which KA government can seize.
Are you aware of the process followed by courts while serving notices? They do not barge in and arrest you at the first instance - they send a legal notice and ask to be present on a so and so date. As per your logic, it is too much of a hassle for RTO so RTO can short circuit any laws and can do what they want. Sorry - I have no counter point against this.


PS: Having a parking sticker or a company sticker is not a proof. My cousin visits my apartment once in a month and he usually stays overnight so I have got him an apartment parking sticker so that he can park his car inside when he is visiting me. Now, it is not a proof that he is staying in my apartment, right?
Similarly, my bike have my company parking sticker but it is being used by my brother - so it is not a proof that he is working in my company, right? I don't remove the sticker since I do take it once in a while to my office and I cannot always put sticker only when I ride.

Quote:
Who is talking about the clubbing the laws?
You! Is it so hard to understand?

Quote:
Currently that proof can only be the NOC request - which proves that the person wishes to move out of the state.
If RTO can use my company ID card and my parking sticker as a proof for demanding me to pay the tax, shouldn't they refund the tax if I can provide them a copy of appointment letter in another state and proof of my stay in another state (like rental agreement, gas connection bill etc) ?

Quote:
A lay man's example. I buy a few things from you, and pay money. Are you really bothered about what I feel, or how I got the money, as long as you are paid? Now for some reason I come and ask you the money back. Will you just believe me, and return the money? You would ask for the reasons and confirmations, right? For RTO that confirmation is the NOC request.
This example in itself is not correct to this case. When I buy something, usually there is no clause that I can come at any time and get a refund. It is usually applicable only if I am renting out something.

If you are renting an apartment, you do pay an advance amount. Now, when you vacate, do you have to provide another rental agreement or sale deed to get the advance back?

--Anoop

Last edited by theexperthand : 10th February 2015 at 15:05.
theexperthand is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Buy car in state or out of state (Major price difference) autoenthusiast The Indian Car Scene 49 14th July 2017 01:21
Karnataka RTO - sms RTO to get Vehicle details 71Convertible The Indian Car Scene 83 8th October 2016 08:09
Where should I sell the car: State of Registration or Current State? m_upreti The Indian Car Scene 50 12th July 2016 17:38
RTO problems for transfering in own state vipinshetty The Indian Car Scene 5 20th February 2013 17:13


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 12:00.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks