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


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 15th April 2015, 16:42   #1291
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,141
Thanked: 682 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Did some study on the Entry Tax which was in vogue in Karnataka, and how it got chucked out by the High Court as being unconstitutional.
The Hindu report dated July 25,2009
A copy of the judgement
M/s L&T were the petitioners in this case, and their contention was that KA Govt. is forcing them to pay an additional tax when non-KA vehicles are brought into the state. Sections 4B and 4-BB in Karnataka Tax an Entry of Goods (Amendment Act) were the trouble making provisions. The petitioners alleged that the sections were violating provisions of Article 301 (right to do trade etc.) and 304A (rights to levy tax in-case of importing items from other states). Sec 304A is interesting. It allows a state to levy a tax on an imported item, if the same item manufactured in the state is also levied the same tax. That is to negate a situation where some item with low or no tax in another state gets brought into KA, where for the same item there is a state specific tax. An entry tax in similar lines did exist in MH as well, but they had a more judicious way of calculating the tax.

But this issue is totally different from the LTT collection which is being done now. No one can call this tax is discriminatory, in fact it is the other way round. Every one plying vehicles in KA are treated equally and have to pay the same LTT. Even with the taxation act amendment, no body is denied the right to bring a vehicle from other states. But once the said vehicle is using KA roads for a period of one month or more, then KA government is setting a level playing ground by asking for LTT to be paid up by non-KA vehicle owners as well.
sachinpk is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 17:29   #1292
Team-BHP Support
 
noopster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pune
Posts: 8,665
Thanked: 9,195 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
When you ask for compassion, are you not ignoring the people who have paid the so-called high motor vehicle tax? A person's opinion on any issue, I feel is also partially influenced by what he sees around him. In my case, the worst thing I have seen is an IT employee (getting paid more than me), making a big hue and cry after the RTO caught his non-KA vehicle.
Oh trust me...Karnataka residents paying 18% and other such ridiculous amounts of tax does invite all my compassion . But that is neither here nor there- if I were a resident of KA and I bought a new car I would pay it too. The whole differential tax structure is an anomaly in today's world. But keep that aside for now.
What was that Voltaire said, "Better that 10 guilty men be set free than 1 innocent man be hanged". This isn't even that extreme. I can understand that cases like your neighbour need to be targeted (I was too, if you read the linked post in my earlier post). But when it's clear that somebody is a temporary visitor to your state you need to be a bit more considerate. Treating every visitor like a common criminal is not a desirable state.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post

I sympathise with you, my friend. Because with this attitude you would only sooner or later get the law enforcement machinery against you. There was a social activist (who mind you have undergone far more torture in a short time, what we may not have undergone in our life time). He did make a fantastic observation. That was it is the responsibility of every individual to know what are the laws which governs him. Only then he will know, what his rights and duties are, and what are the problems with the law. And any way "Ignornace of law is never an excuse". So tomorrow if the KA RTO catches you, you decide to take it to the courts and makes the same statement about "freedom of movement, this tax, that tax" etc. don't expect much from the magistrate.
Nobody is claiming ignorance of the law as an excuse here. It's just the legitimacy of the law itself that we are discussing and debating (in civil terms, mind you, which is how we do things here). It's our duty to abide by the laws of the country and state YES but if something seems patently unfair it's also our civic duty to speak up against it. Perhaps someone high up may get wind of the discussion and see the injustice of the law or its enforcement.
noopster is offline   (5) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 17:32   #1293
Distinguished - BHPian
 
saket77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Ranchi
Posts: 3,191
Thanked: 4,245 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
No one can call this tax is discriminatory, in fact it is the other way round. Every one plying vehicles in KA are treated equally and have to pay the same LTT. Even with the taxation act amendment, no body is denied the right to bring a vehicle from other states. But once the said vehicle is using KA roads for a period of one month or more, then KA government is setting a level playing ground by asking for LTT to be paid up by non-KA vehicle owners as well.
Well, the rule is discriminatory if you are willing to see it fairly.

Summoning up the tax calculation reference table posted by another BHPian in this thread earlier shows that KA RTO are charging more for vehicles moving to KA. When they can simply use Pro-rata method by taking into account that the LTT is valid for 15 years, they have formed another rule by developing their own table.

Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore-tax.jpeg <br />
Now for Eg. say a vehicle is just under 8 years old. So, effectively by pro-rata basis, the tax should be about 46.66% as only 7 years of the 15 years lifetime are remaining. <br /> <br />
Hence calculation should be (7/15) *100 of the Total LTT which comes to 46.66%. So, rather than charging 46.66%, KA is charging 59% of LTT  <b>straightaway ripping off a good 12.34%!!</b> <br /> <br />
So, for a car having an <b>Ex-showroom price of Rs. 10L; 46.66% comes to Rs. 65,324/- and 59% comes to Rs. 82,600/</b> @14% LTT for 15 years-. How cool is that on part of the RTO?  <u>And how can you now say that the rule is not discriminatory to outsiders?</u> And why should I pay this Rs 17,276/- over the already high tax rate of KA? Just imagine the plight of a person who has to pay 45% of LTT for using his cars for just 4 years in KA - this according to the table for a vehicle of 11 years of age! The difference in pro-rata and 45% for 4 years comes to almost 2 times!!<br /> <br />
Please see the rule book of JH - I know you can argue that it is state matter of KA, but then there is a thing called 'being fair'. Please see the screenshot from JH RTO site (the underlined & boxed part) which clearly says that the remaining LTT is charged on Pro-rata basis:<br /> <br /> <a href=Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore-untitled.jpg   <div style=
saket77 is online now   (8) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 17:46   #1294
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,141
Thanked: 682 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by noopster
But when it's clear that somebody is a temporary visitor to your state you need to be a bit more considerate. Treating every visitor like a common criminal is not a desirable state.
The whole issue is who is a temporary visitor . KA state feels any body who stays for less than a period of one month in KA, can be called a temporary visitor. There are others who feel that it would take 12 months for the status to change, there are yet others who would insist that even if it for 2-3 years also the "temporary visitor" tag should not be taken away.

Every common visitor is not treated as a criminal. KA and Bangalore are still very liberal when it comes to accepting visitors. But the problem is when the visitors bring in their vehicles as well and generally show no inclination of moving back or paying the LTT. From what I can see here is that KA government authorities and non-KA vehicle owners are well entrenched in their positions. KA Govt. and RTO feels that enough is enough no point in showing leniency to a set of tax dodgers who have been having fun till the amendment came in. It is a big concern if an "Us v/s Them" mentality gains more credibility.

Quote:
It's just the legitimacy of the law itself that we are discussing and debating (in civil terms, mind you, which is how we do things here)
It may be a purely my thoughts by humyum's way of articulating his points gave me an impression that he is really not bothered about any law, and he would only believe a law which he feels is justifiable. That is perfectly all right. But do you think the very same attitude would, told in the same style he has written it down here, would be considered by any judicial court, or government officials? Here again with the Amendment, the processes followed are legally valid. Perhaps it is the spirit in the "letter & spirit of the law" which people are debating. So far I am yet to see any one with legal points proving that KA has over-stepped its rights and illegally introduced a new law. Even Hon.HC of KA has not found that the law prima-facie is illegal.

Quote:
It's our duty to abide by the laws of the country and state YES but if something seems patently unfair it's also our civic duty to speak up against it. Perhaps someone high up may get wind of the discussion and see the injustice of the law or its enforcement.
Agree. But throwing tantrums and raising an issue through more democratic means or judicial means is different. Throwing tantrums only gets more people riled up. The other ways are more purposeful. One team has taken it up with the judiciary (instead of tantrums), but I am yet to see any delegations any approaching the actual legislature (i.e M/s Siddaramiah & Co.). No idea why that route was not taken up. Working along side state level politicians also may bring in faster results. May be not in this issue, but I have seen lots of social groups/welfare organisations/clubs who actually approach the various authorities and ministries to put up their grievance. And they do get some results too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by saket77
Well, the rule is discriminatory if you are willing to see it fairly.
There is a subtle difference there. Because we are talking about too different laws. In the case of "Entry Tax", the issue was different and charges levied by a different act. Here the issue was that L&T was bringing in vehicles and equipments from non-KA territory. These same vehicles and equipments were also available at KA, but at a higher price due to higher sales tax. KA's argument was that in that case every one would just bring in the same equipments from outside the state, in order to escape from higher sales tax in KA. That got thrown out by the court stating that, in that case KA should revise its tax slabs to make it more competitive. The state of MH also had a similar law (from what I could make out in the judgement), but it was better. What MH did was to check how much tax the vehicle/equipment owner paid in the state where the purchase was made. Then compare it with sales tax which MH levies on the same vehicle/equipment. The difference is the "Entry tax". For example sales tax for a tractor in MP is 1000, for the same brand of tractor MH charges Rs.1500 as sales tax. Entry tax at MH would be just Rs.500/-. KA, I feel did not think in those lines and put up a flat % as the tax.

So a law related to Sales Tax collection and a law related to Motor Vehicle Taxation cannot be considered to be in the same lines.

Quote:
Summoning up the tax calculation reference table posted by another BHPian in this thread earlier shows that KA RTO are charging more for vehicles moving to KA.
....
Now for Eg. say a vehicle is just under 8 years old. So, effectively by pro-rata basis, the tax should be about 46.66% as only 7 years of the 15 years lifetime are remaining.
A quick question. Are there two different tables to calculate depreciation (and LTT) for a vehicle registered in KA, and a vehicle registered in non-KA area? Or is it that KA uses a table to calculate depreciation across the board, but a non-KA vehicle owner may have a disadvantage? If KA follows one single rule book/table for all vehicles running in the state, I don't think we can call it discriminatory.

In a hurry now. Will get back after checking the calculations as well .

Last edited by sachinpk : 15th April 2015 at 18:06.
sachinpk is offline  
Old 15th April 2015, 18:19   #1295
Distinguished - BHPian
 
saket77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Ranchi
Posts: 3,191
Thanked: 4,245 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
There is a subtle difference there. Because we are talking about too different laws. In the case of "Entry Tax", -----So a law related to Sales Tax collection and a law related to Motor Vehicle Taxation cannot be considered to be in the same lines.
Not talking of entry tax at all. All about road tax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
A quick question. Are there two different tables to calculate depreciation (and LTT) for a vehicle registered in KA, and a vehicle registered in non-KA area? Or is it that KA uses a table to calculate depreciation across the board, but a non-KA vehicle owner may have a disadvantage? If KA follows one single rule book/table for all vehicles running in the state, I don't think we can call it discriminatory.
And can you please let me know why will a vehicle already registered in KA will require this table except for a very very few rare cases? This table only affects vehicles which are registered outside of KA. You buy a vehicle in KA, you are paying less LTT; while if I move to KA with my 8 year old car, I am paying more than you. That is discrimination- right?
saket77 is online now   (4) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 19:17   #1296
BHPian
 
vinayrathore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: DL-9C/KA-01
Posts: 528
Thanked: 306 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
Every common visitor is not treated as a criminal. KA and Bangalore are still very liberal when it comes to accepting visitors. But the problem is when the visitors bring in their vehicles as well and generally show no inclination of moving back or paying the LTT.
May be purely my way of comprehension but this sounds like KA government is doing a favor here. Sounds more like a person who murdered someone in another state is being shown leniency in KA and is allowed to stay for 30 days before being arrested.

On a serious note, accepting visitors from within India is not a state's prerogative for that matter. We are one country.

Last edited by vinayrathore : 15th April 2015 at 19:19.
vinayrathore is offline   (6) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 19:18   #1297
BHPian
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 910
Thanked: 296 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

The state charges LTT for the state roads. But remember, other than within city limits or town or village limits, the roads are private, BOTS. We pay toll on most roads- electronic city, nelamangala, nice road, etc. all are toll roads. In fact I've seen toll booths within the city only in Bangalore. There are no alternate routes to anywhere in Karnataka where one can travel without paying toll. So why the hefty LTT?

Also imagine if the Karnataka govt. passes a rule saying that LTT which had a validity of 15 years previously will now be valid for only 5 years, will all the law abiding persons in this discussion pay without protest? At the same slabs?
wildsdi5530 is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 21:58   #1298
Senior - BHPian
 
suresh_gs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: KA-01 / TN-22
Posts: 1,934
Thanked: 1,158 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Dear members

A friend of mine is facing this predicament. Need your opinion on this

"I brought my UP registered Alto 2 years (in year 2006) after it was purchased in UP in year 2004. I voluntarily went and paid the road tax within a week at Indiranagar RTO, without involving any agents. I had to pay about Rs. 6,000 as road tax for new Alto in Ghaziabad, UP. And I paid about Rs 23k for 2 years old car in Bangalore. I did not get number changed to KA number, as RTO official had said that no need to change number, and I can drive peacefully. Now I am trying to get it KA registered, since I need to dispose (sell) off this car, and it is has been real pain with all the rules of getting NOC from the Ghaziabad RTO. My condition is worseed because, my home district was broken into two districts, and my home lies in newly formed district, and all the files of RTO are still lying in Ghaziabad RTO, while NOC will be issued from new district RTO and I need to wait for files to be transferred from Ghaziabad RTO to new RTO. And without NOC nothing is possible here. Even if I do not want to get LTT refund from Ghaziabad RTO, I can not register my car here, all due to the RTO rules. It is a real pain. Sending the car back is not an option due to transportation cost and extremely low resale value up north"
suresh_gs is offline  
Old 15th April 2015, 22:05   #1299
Team-BHP Support
 
Jaggu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 17,752
Thanked: 7,471 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Find a dealer who would buy and take care of the headache, that is what i would opt OR find a buyer from UP who will share the cost of transporting it to UP. No straight forward solution to this.
Jaggu is offline   (1) Thanks
Old 15th April 2015, 22:13   #1300
Senior - BHPian
 
srishiva's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 3,580
Thanked: 821 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsdi5530 View Post
The state charges LTT for the state roads. But remember, other than within city limits or town or village limits, the roads are private, BOTS. We pay toll on most roads- electronic city, nelamangala, nice road, etc. all are toll roads. In fact I've seen toll booths within the city only in Bangalore. There are no alternate routes to anywhere in Karnataka where one can travel without paying toll. So why the hefty LTT?

Also imagine if the Karnataka govt. passes a rule saying that LTT which had a validity of 15 years previously will now be valid for only 5 years, will all the law abiding persons in this discussion pay without protest? At the same slabs?
Only some roads going out of Bengaluru are tolled (that too by NHAI).

Last edited by srishiva : 15th April 2015 at 22:18.
srishiva is online now  
Old 16th April 2015, 01:07   #1301
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Gurgaon
Posts: 161
Thanked: 177 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

This discussion isn't going anywhere.

This is a proven until guilty law where RTO impounds cars on base of suspicion. For murder cases, it is okay, but for tax cases, it is not.

Some people contend that people who move to Bangalore and stay over a month are mostly likely to settle for life. That's ridiculous. In IT, people are highly mobile. I have stayed in three states (including KA) in last six years. At every place, it was over one year.

You can't deal everyone with one same size stick. There should be yearly, quarterly arrangement for paying taxes. So that, people could pay tax based on their estimated stay.

I must admit, no one place else, local people are as friendly to migrants as KA.

Just that, its quite unfortunate, that local governments is trying to kill the golden goose. I simple say no to Bangalore projects just because it's a nightmare to manage so much of money for rent, house security and LTT within first month of movement. Even if typical projects last 1-1.5 years.
atnyia is offline   (5) Thanks
Old 16th April 2015, 01:26   #1302
BHPian
 
Driving_Nomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bengaluru
Posts: 169
Thanked: 79 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by humyum View Post
So were the RTO guys abiding by the law when they were harassing people who could even prove they had come here only for some days? Were they abiding by the law when even after the court's stay the RTO guys were still asking for NOC's and road tax receipts?
If someone is harassed by the police, they can always lodge a complaint and take it up in a court. Someone mentioned above that he, after twenty minutes of discussion, was let go with a nominal bribe. I would say, when you know you have all documents and haven't done anything illegal, why settle to bribe?

It's the duty of cops to check and validate vehicle documents. Even if one is not carrying the documents a cop asks to see, he/she can always ask the cop to serve a notice and go back to the jurisdictional police station (within fifteen days) and produce the documents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by humyum View Post
PY is not equal to any other state. When you catch hold of PY cars it can be a case of 'saving on road tax' but when you catch hold of a MH car, the taxes are more or less similar and hence there is no question of buying a car in MH for tax evasion.
PY or MH, none of them would qualify as 'saving on road tax', they would always be 'Evading road tax'.

Why not? people living in Belgaum can always buy in MH and get it registered there. Even if it were to save a few thousand rupees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by humyum View Post
'Run over' is too big a word to use for that video. Its like someone nudging someone and you say 'attempt to murder'.
I agree. But when people start using the word harassment for just being asked to pull over and produce documents, the policeman who filed a case on that lady will definitely have used the terms 'tried to run over', 'attempt to kill' etc. even if it were to save the Dept's ego.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xotiq View Post
The 1 month rule is unfair, and strange. (why 30 days? similar to a single entry visa?).

I know the Govt here is extra proactive when it comes vehicle and fuel taxes. Now if they could be equally aggressive in introducing a swift and easy refund system for tax paid based on number of years spent in KA, so that refunds are hassle free. Retrospectively, this would garner more tax collection than going for a forced drive like now.
There's something called as 'Sakaala' in Karnataka (applicable to most of the Govt. offices). You get an acknowledgement for every inward application into an RTO and every kind of job has a sakaala (time period) set to it. If the job doesn't get done within that time, you can directly go and speak/submit a sakaala form to the Road Transport Officer and he/she will be obliged to have the job done. Googling on Sakaala will give you more information and better equip you to handle people in Govt. offices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xotiq View Post
On a lighter side, evading the RTO authorities in BLR has some best practices...

>Non KA vehicles with number plate written in Kannada. (Such vehicles have to be given a tax discount in the interest of promoting local language)
>Army/Press stickers prominently displayed (yet the owners are invariably non fauj- IT folks)
>Non existent front number plate (preempting a frontal catch and punish?)
>Vehicles running on Temp/For Regn plates for an eternity.
>Plate artistry... Ex. How HR is made to look like KA.
>Regimental Emblems stuck on the registration plate.
Correct me if I am wrong, per CMVR, the number plate cannot be written in any other language than English. Violating another rule while covering up one
Have the Army/Press stickers and get caught once and you will see for yourself.
The last one might still get you to go scot free. But wait, regimental people wouldn't buy cars outside KA and I the guess police have that much common sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiloAlpha View Post
I agree with the revenue leakage part. I guess my suggestion would work if this system were to be implemented pan-India. And if fuel prices were not drastically different, the incentive to hop across the border to fill up would be a little less.

How many people from around Karwar regularly hop into Goa to fill up? Quite a few, I would have guessed.
Not sure about that border because the pumps aren't near the border but for other border villages there would be quite a bunch who do that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by saket77 View Post
Well, the rule is discriminatory if you are willing to see it fairly.

Now for Eg. say a vehicle is just under 8 years old. So, effectively by pro-rata basis, the tax should be about 46.66% as only 7 years of the 15 years lifetime are remaining.

Hence calculation should be (7/15) *100 of the Total LTT which comes to 46.66%. So, rather than charging 46.66%, KA is charging 59% of LTT straightaway ripping off a good 12.34%!!
Qualifies for a PIL (not sure if I am missing anything) and if you happen to win, it will help a lot of folks.
Driving_Nomad is offline  
Old 16th April 2015, 08:14   #1303
Senior - BHPian
 
suresh_gs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: KA-01 / TN-22
Posts: 1,934
Thanked: 1,158 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Road tax highest in KA

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/46928418.cms
suresh_gs is offline  
Old 16th April 2015, 10:14   #1304
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1,141
Thanked: 682 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by saket77
And can you please let me know why will a vehicle already registered in KA will require this table except for a very very few rare cases?
To prove discrimination you may to clearly prove that their exists two different taxation norms - one for KA registered vehicles and another different one for non-KA users. But if in any circumstance (how ever few it may be), if KA RTO proves that it uses the same benchmark when dealing with all people (non-KA and KA), then how can it be said to be discriminatory? Any way if there is indeed scope for this, I guess SILVERWOOD (Waseem) and his lawyers may have thought about this angle as well.

Quote:
When they can simply use Pro-rata method by taking into account that the LTT is valid for 15 years, they have formed another rule by developing their own table.
If the current legal framework allows them to decide the methods of taxation, how can that be held as illegal? Kerala MVD has its own table (Ref: Page 9 in the PDF) when it comes to arriving at the tax, which as I see is different from the way KA calculates it. The catch here is that does any other rule (Central or State) clearly say that Pro-rata method has to be used to determine the tax. If that is not the case, the states can decide how the LTT should be decided.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vinayrathore
On a serious note, accepting visitors from within India is not a state's prerogative for that matter. We are one country.
Off course yes. Any person (from India) can visit and stay in Bangalore (or any where in KA), and can use trains,buses,flights or own cars to arrive in KA and in Bangalore. But if they come by their own private vehicle, and stay in KA area for more than a month then they have to pay the state determined LTT on the vehicle. Because as of now KA feels that no tourist/temporary visitor ideally would have to stay put in the state for more than 30 days at a stretch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsdi5530
Also imagine if the Karnataka govt. passes a rule saying that LTT which had a validity of 15 years previously will now be valid for only 5 years, will all the law abiding persons in this discussion pay without protest? At the same slabs?
Sir, we can imagine any thing. You can put up a scenario saying "Imagine KA government not allowing non-KA vehicles on the road at all" etc. etc. That would be endless. So let us take a case which has actually happened. In the situation you mentioned even the local populace (which includes majority of voters in state elections) would rise up. Siddaramaiah may very well lose the next elections. So he is not such a fool to pick a wrong target.

Quote:
Originally Posted by srishiva
Only some roads going out of Bengaluru are tolled (that too by NHAI).
To add on. The state level motor vehicle tax collected can be (and most likely) used any where in the state. It is different from a toll which NHAI levies. The toll is for upkeep of roads in a particular stretch, a motor vehicle tax is not for that purpose. The LTT I paid, may have been used to upgrade in some remote village in Belgaum or Bijapur Dt, on which I may have not even travel once. There are 1000s of kms worth road in KA which is maintained by the state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by atnyia
This is a proven until guilty law where RTO impounds cars on base of suspicion.
RTO is impounding the car to ensure that the vehicle owners turns up with evidence or with the tax amount. RTO is dealing with a non-KA vehicle. So allowing such a vehicle to go through means, he would not be able to track it down later if required. RTOs collect the original RC if the vehicle owner carries it. Xerox copies have no value or use here. No body is considered guilty by default. But the person charged has to come back at a later point of time. RTO cannot just leave non-KA vehicle owners after listening to what ever excuse they would cook up.

This is a simple thing sir. RTO stops non-KA vehicle. They start their own evidence gathering. RTO finds that vehicle has been in KA for more than a month. The driver/owner may say that he has proof for his claims, but it is all at home. He may give any address as his home address. So what is the next logical thing to do? Seize the vehicle temporarily allow the owner/driver to go, so that he can collect all evidences and come back. Well if he don't have evidence he can bring in the LTT+fine and pay up. Please note that at no point the owner/driver arrested or detained.

Quote:
That's ridiculous. In IT, people are highly mobile. I have stayed in three states (including KA) in last six years. At every place, it was over one year.
IT does not make India. If IT people are too mobile, they can also use their collective might to change the laws. Bring in a central legislation or some thing similar. Expecting every state to bend over backwards to please the IT crowd may not very practical, in my humble opinion.

Quote:
Just that, its quite unfortunate, that local governments is trying to kill the golden goose. I simple say no to Bangalore projects just because it's a nightmare to manage so much of money for rent, house security and LTT within first month of movement. Even if typical projects last 1-1.5 years.
Many companies have realised this too . Some IT big-wigs have clearly decided to use their centres in Tier II cities for future development. Not only because of LTT, Bangalore is generally becoming a place which is unaffordable. Overhead costs on projects come down by 10-12% if it is executed out of other Tier II cities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driving_Nomad
It's the duty of cops to check and validate vehicle documents. Even if one is not carrying the documents a cop asks to see, he/she can always ask the cop to serve a notice and go back to the jurisdictional police station (within fifteen days) and produce the documents.
There is a catch here. If a notice has to be served, the charged person has to surrender some original document (DL or RC book) to the police officer. Other wise the vehicle can be detained, or the police officer would insist a spot fine. Seizing an original document is to ensure that the charged person comes back with the rest of the documents. And I fully support this. With the kind of excuses people cook up, no sensible police officer would listen to any sob-story which the charged person may come up with.

Quote:
Correct me if I am wrong, per CMVR, the number plate cannot be written in any other language than English.
As per CMVR there should be a number plate which has English alphabets and Arabic numerals. The mandatory size of the name plate is also specified. In addition to that the state can allow a number plate using the local state language on any other part of the vehicle. But the English one is mandatory. If you notice TN State buses they follow the rule to the T. On the back right hand side they have the mandatory one. On the left they have the "Ta.Na - nn Aa.nnnn" type number as well (all in Tamil).

Last edited by sachinpk : 16th April 2015 at 10:20.
sachinpk is offline  
Old 16th April 2015, 11:42   #1305
Distinguished - BHPian
 
saket77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Ranchi
Posts: 3,191
Thanked: 4,245 Times
Default Re: Case: Out of State Cars vs RTO Bangalore

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinpk View Post
To prove discrimination you may to clearly prove that their exists two different taxation norms - one for KA registered vehicles and another different one for non-KA users. But if in any circumstance (how ever few it may be), if KA RTO proves that it uses the same benchmark when dealing with all people (non-KA and KA), then how can it be said to be discriminatory? Any way if there is indeed scope for this, I guess SILVERWOOD (Waseem) and his lawyers may have thought about this angle as well.


If the current legal framework allows them to decide the methods of taxation, how can that be held as illegal? Kerala MVD has its own table (Ref: Page 9 in the PDF) when it comes to arriving at the tax, which as I see is different from the way KA calculates it. The catch here is that does any other rule (Central or State) clearly say that Pro-rata method has to be used to determine the tax. If that is not the case, the states can decide how the LTT should be decided.
The KA depreciation table is unfair because it affects NON-KA Cars only. KA cars would not require this table. I pay many grands more than a KA bought & registered car if I move my car from JH to KA. If that is not discrimination, I do not know what is. And this discrimination comes in the way of my 'freedom of movement'. If you pretend to close your eyes to every fact and logic and just push the rule book forward everytime, then please know that it *is*the same rule book which is being challenged. If rule books were to be the last word always, there would have been no changes in the Constitution, laws and acts ever. Countless thrones and Govts. have been toppled in the past over unfair rules and it is just a matter of time that KA RTO mends their unfair ways.

By the table that you provided, sadly you have yourself failed to notice that the KL RTO calculates depreciation in a fair way and purely on Pro-rata basis. I have simplified the table for easy understanding and proven that how the calculation is fair. The numbers exactly corresponds to yearly pro-rata basis:


Name:  untitled.JPG
Views: 1882
Size:  71.2 KB<br /> <br /> <br />
Please remember, it is the rule itself which is being challenged. So your argument that "<i>it is a rule hence correct</i>" does not stand anymore.<br /> <br />
Regards.</div>   <div style=
saket77 is online now   (3) Thanks
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 10:31.

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