[sachinpk]

Originally Posted by saket77

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.

Point taken . I am sure then this can be challenged in the courts, but don't think so it is done yet. So after this long debate we have given the petitioners some sort of a new weapon. Hope they try it out.

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 did not check the actual figures, and the computation (I am a dud when it comes to Maths any ways). But what I said was that every state has its own mechanism to calculate the taxes. The next question is that does the current legal framework allows each state to come up with its own taxation norms. If it allows then KA can come up with any rule to determine the taxes. This is an interesting point, as it has implications on other states like PY also. KA can very well say that if PY can have a low tax rate (which makes people try buy and register vehicles there), KA can also demand that they jack up the tax rates. Or else there should be some legal directive which states that every state has to have a minimum and maximum value/percentage which can be charges a Motor Vehicle Tax.

Please remember, it is the rule itself which is being challenged. So your argument that "it is a rule hence correct" does not stand anymore.

If I get it right, the Motor Vehicle Taxation Act amendment was for just one thing. That is the duration of stay in KA was reduced to 30 days from 12 months which was earlier. The way the taxes were calculated were not amended. If I get it right, even under the previous version of the law at the end of 12 months the LTT was determined by the same formula.

The petition filed at Hon.HC was challenging the amendment, and NOT challenging the tax calculation mechanism. The petitioners stated that collecting Life Time Tax from a vehicle for just staying over 30 days in KA was not right. I have not seen the actual petition which the petitioners have submitted in the HC. Or else that would have clearly stated what are the points of concerns. Whether i) it was the short time frame (of 30 days), ii) or collecting LTT itself (instead of instalments), iii) or on the way LTT is calculated. My understanding is that it was for point #1 only. The way the tax gets calculated still does not seem to be annulled by the court (or by the government) so it still remains valid.

PS: A recent far reaching order by the Hon.SC was chucking out Sec 66A of IT Act (which also lead to chucking out of Sec 118d of Kerala Police Act), as being vaguely defined and violating the constitution. So here the Hon.SC did not chuck out the entire IT Act or K.P Act, only the section which had the problem was annulled. So when you raise a case against a particular section in an act, it does NOT mean that the validity of the entire act is getting challenged. The petition filed in KA H.C seems to be challenging the amendment to a specific section on Karnataka Motor Vehicle Taxation Act. This section relates to the time period. Other sections are not challenged at all. So challenging a rule/section is != challenging the entire rule book/act.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by sachinpk

Point taken . I am sure then this can be challenged in the courts, but don't think so it is done yet. So after this long debate we have given the petitioners some sort of a new weapon. Hope they try it out.

Glad that our debate has been constructive. Hope that petitioners would also look into these points, if not already.

Originally Posted by sachinpk

I did not check the actual figures, and the computation (I am a dud when it comes to Maths any ways). But what I said was that every state has its own mechanism to calculate the taxes.

The state has the right, but the mechanism should be fair. And I have checked the calculation and it has been presented in the excel sheet without any prejudice. Attaching the Excel sheet to this message.

Originally Posted by sachinpk

The next question is that does the current legal framework allows each state to come up with its own taxation norms. If it allows then KA can come up with any rule to determine the taxes. This is an interesting point, as it has implications on other states like PY also. KA can very well say that if PY can have a low tax rate (which makes people try buy and register vehicles there), KA can also demand that they jack up the tax rates. Or else there should be some legal directive which states that every state has to have a minimum and maximum value/percentage which can be charges a Motor Vehicle Tax.

Please do not help them spread the virus. Already taxes are collected in *Advance* for 15 years. I will use the road over 15 years but I have to pay today. If my vehicle gets scrapped before 15 years, I lose all paid taxes. It would be better if they come up with something like 5 yearly taxes; just like in WB, so that it hurts less in such cases. Even if I sell my car, I lose much lesser.

Originally Posted by sachinpk

If I get it right, the Motor Vehicle Taxation Act amendment was for just one thing. That is the duration of stay in KA was reduced to 30 days from 12 months which was earlier. The way the taxes were calculated were not amended. If I get it right, even under the previous version of the law at the end of 12 months the LTT was determined by the same formula.

So the thing is that the previous rule was amended. So, it wasn't the last word. I see no reason why this rule should also not be amended - surely this isn't the last word either; particularly when it is unfair. When you enter a state, you get a computerized toll receipt stating your vehicle registration number. This means toll booths have the records. These records are also used to trace stolen vehicles/ accidents enroute, etc. If KA RTO was concerned over tax evasion, they could have easily created a system where they can check if any particular vehicle has been in the state for more than a year or was just a visitor. Not doing this clearly proves their ulterior motives. Even if such outside KA vehicles stayed in KA for long and only crossed borders to collect toll receipts, they could have easily traced such offenders. Crackdown on such people would have been appreciated rather than using the same yardstick for all.

Originally Posted by sachinpk

The petition filed at Hon.HC was challenging the amendment, and NOT challenging the tax calculation mechanism. The petitioners stated that collecting Life Time Tax from a vehicle for just staying over 30 days in KA was not right. I have not seen the actual petition which the petitioners have submitted in the HC. Or else that would have clearly stated what are the points of concerns. Whether i) it was the short time frame (of 30 days), ii) or collecting LTT itself (instead of instalments), iii) or on the way LTT is calculated. My understanding is that it was for point #1 only. The way the tax gets calculated still does not seem to be annulled by the court (or by the government) so it still remains valid.

My response to you was on the point that you stated that the rule is not discriminatory to outsiders. I proved that otherwise. This helps the case I believe.

Regards.

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by Jaggu

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.

There's also a small caveat in the taxation laws somewhere that you aren't entitled to an LTT refund if you chose not to change the registration number while paying up, at least not until you actually transfer registration to the new RTO.

[sachinpk]

Originally Posted by saket77

So the thing is that the previous rule was amended. So, it wasn't the last word. I see no reason why this rule should also not be amended - surely this isn't the last word either; particularly when it is unfair

These are all man-made laws. Even Indian Constitution is man-made. So nothing is sacrosanct. How ever there are well laid out procedures to make changes in the law and the constitution. So in this case, the same route has to be tried. Either KA government has to be approached to amend the law, or the courts have to be approached to force KA government. The state also has its own ways and means to justify its stand.

When you enter a state, you get a computerized toll receipt stating your vehicle registration number.

We can't assume that. When travelling from KL there is only one toll booth at Karnataka border, which is at Attibele. I know at least 5 other routes using which I can enter KL, without paying a toll. Through TVS check post, through Gundlupet, through HD-Kotte/Handpost and another two routes via Tholpetty. How will KA government know that I have entered KA on a date & time? Well they can set up check posts at all these places. But there would be huge pile up of vehicles, and double it during holidays/vacations etc.

My response to you was on the point that you stated that the rule is not discriminatory to outsiders. I proved that otherwise. This helps the case I believe.

Agreed. Current petition does not cover this. And also need to see how the state responds to this. But yes, this point can be highlighted. But a bit surprised that no one has tried this before. The taxation laws and the schedule for taxes have been in existence for ages.

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

There's also a small caveat in the taxation laws somewhere that you aren't entitled to an LTT refund if you chose not to change the registration number while paying up.

You should stand up to "Attention" and salute the people who have framed these laws. So the people who paid LTT during the recent tax collection drive, would also get this small "bomb" when they decide to quit KA and move else where. The LTT paid is pretty much gone, as they would not have bothered to get the vehicle re-registered.

[noopster]

Originally Posted by suresh_gs

Dear members

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

The LTT is already paid in Karnataka so getting the number changed should be a formality right? Like Jaggu suggested make it someone else's problem. Or better still contact any agent with connects in Ghaziabad RTO to get the NOC for you. I Paid 2000 to my HSBC DSA in 2002 to get this from MH06 after re-registering at KA05.

Just curious- you've already borne the brunt of the expense, why sell it now?

[saket77]

Originally Posted by suresh_gs

It is a real pain. Sending the car back is not an option due to transportation cost and extremely low resale value up north"

If I would have been in your place, I would have transported the car back to the native place in UP. You will anyways suffer a lower resale even if you sell it to some dealer in B'lore because of the hoopla involved. So, better to transport it back so that your folks can use it or sell it there.

Originally Posted by Jaggu

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.

The problem will not end until the vehicle is transferred to the new owner. This will involve getting NOC again which means long delays. It is not worth the risk to keep the car in your name (& not in physical possession) until the paperwork comes clean; hence my advice.

Regards,
Saket

[apachelongbow]

This entire confusion comes from the fact that the center is governing each state like a federally administered alliance, with common defense and foreign policies. So each state has to generate its own share of revenues a portion of which feeds the center. Hence Karnataka state has full legal right to charge whatever tax it feels, on roads, vehicles and resources, just like any other state. If they make a policy making it mandatory for each person residing in Karnataka to register their vehicle in Karnataka, legally, they are well within the law. They need not justify why the tax rates are higher or only a one month notice needs to be given before taxes are paid, or why a lumpsum 15 year tax is collected etc. This I am stating merely from a legal premise alone.
Hence the crackdown or chase for higher revenues is also justified.

[sachinpk]

Originally Posted by apachelongbow

This entire confusion comes from the fact that the center is governing each state like a federally administered alliance, with common defense and foreign policies.

To add on, but no way related to LTT (or automotive sector itself). The current central government has been advocating a policy of every State getting more liberty to set its policies, but with a caveat that the state also should figure out a way to generate the revenue. Central Govt., doling out huge sums for very many schemes are getting done away with. From an earlier state of financing 12-15 odd schemes, the Central Government has pulled away from many, and now only 4-5 schemes exist.

So during the long run, any state which cannot plan its budget properly, cannot collect its revenue on time, and cannot come up with self-sustaining revenue generation models, those states would abysmally fail. The current trend of demanding/asking/begging for more Central Govt., funds and blaming them if it does not come, is going to a story of the past.

[Chetan_Rao]

I find it amusing that fairness doesn't seem to even enter the conversation here. The law is the law and needs to be followed, and whatever is done to uphold and implement it is justified and correct doesn't sound very fair to me, or does it?

The citizen is expected to do the 'right' thing within defined parameters, but the system itself seems exempt from any such encumbrances. I'm expected to pay up within a month of landing in KA (I voluntarily paid up within a week back in 2010 BTW), but will the same authority process my refund within a month when I leave KA? If I have no right to use 'their' infrastructure without paying for it (fair enough I admit), what right do they have to sit on 'my' money when it's no longer due to them? My refund claim in MP is pending since FOUR years, and I've spent more that what's due to me from them to follow up, without success just as a matter of principle and because I refuse to bribe the people involved to get my own money. I know plenty of KA residents in the same boat. KA RTO officers openly encourage you to just pay tax and not bother 're-registering' as the tax receipt is 'enough to avoid hassle', while conveniently forgetting to tell the citizen that the hassle being avoided is the RTO's (not the user's) in NOT having to process transfer paperwork in tandem with the source RTO plus the chance to keep the money forever when the user leaves KA.

Ask any legal champion that question (including those on this very thread) and all you'll get is either a philosophical, non-committal "the system has problems" or "sue them if you want to", neither of which is a valid argument to make. I'll not even bother to get into what happens if one actually does decide to sue.

I have no problem doing the fair or right thing (I already have, voluntarily), but I don't find it right or fair that I'm the fool in the bargain because the other side won't reciprocate when it's their turn, and they're somehow justified in doing it because 'that's the law' and I just need to grin and bear it or 'leave if I don't like it'.

Perks of democracy, I guess.

[apachelongbow]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

I find it amusing that fairness doesn't seem to even enter the conversation here. The law is the law and needs to be followed, and whatever is done to uphold and implement it is justified and correct doesn't sound very fair to me, or does it?

Perks of democracy, I guess.

This is how the law is everywhere in the world. If the law is legalized, it has to be followed, then don't expect mercy or sympathy from people who are merely implementing it and doing their duty. If you have a problem with the law, there are ways and means of bringing it up, what you have done is right, first comply with the law, the second step is raise a written complaint, file a RTI, raise a PIL in the court explaining how it is unfair. These are legal remedies available to you.

Regarding talk about democracy etc, be happy that this very democracy is giving us the freedom to discuss and debate on all things, try doing this in China or Pakistan, and I am sure you would either be eliminated or working in some Gulag.

[SILVERWOOD]

Update:

We are in receipt of the certified copy where-in the stay got vacated and we will soon be filing an appeal which will come-up before a larger bench.

The case is still ON and it will sway in our favour in due course of time.

We have evidence where-in Non-KA cars were stopped and by RTO guys during the period of stay and LTT was collected from these hapless car owners.We may file a contempt petition as well.

Waseem.

[SILVERWOOD]

I am sure there are people (including on this very thread as well) who are direct/indirect beneficiaries of the ill-goten wealth being accumulated by these RTO thugs and touts and they have every reason to defend their actions come what may.I request them to take time & read this judgement which was pronounced by the Chief Justice of Hyderabad High Court.

http://164.100.12.10/hcorders/orders..._6978_2015.pdf

I fail to understand how on the earth some can defend actions the most corrupt department of our great democracy. Don't they have a guilty conscience.?

Waseem.

[SILVERWOOD]

Originally Posted by apachelongbow

This is how the law is everywhere in the world. If the law is legalized, it has to be followed, then don't expect mercy or sympathy from people who are merely implementing it and doing their duty.

This was posted on our FB group sometime back & i am not sure who has authored it.This law is and will always be a joke.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ................

Of Nuremberg defence and Karnataka RTO

It is little less than 70 years ago when the guns of second world war fell silent. Any one of the readers who have paid even a dime worth attention during your history class in school will perhaps recall the most ghastly crime perpetrated during the war against humanity. More than 6 million (that is 60 lakhs in Indian way of counting) people following Judaism (i.e. Jews) have been executed by one of the loosing states, Nazi Germany. The Americans, being one of the victors, scratched their head over this organisational genius of a criminal state that wiped out 6 million people from earth's face. You see, murdering and tossing a body in sewer is one thing; wiping out an entire population is a whole different level. You need a whole lot of planning, logistics, engineering, medical and even legal aide to orchestrate the entire macabre. The Nazis knew that and so they created entire departments, staffed with civil servants; educated and smart individuals, equivalent to a modern day corporate high flyer to 'liquidate' the 'unwanted'. Once the war was lost, to nobody's surprise, all of these Nazi officials and bureaucrat were rounded up and were made to answer for their actions in a place called Nuremberg in Germany. One very simple question asked to all of them during their trial was basically 'What the hell were they thinking and why the hell they did what they did'. An expected emotional response would have been a person breaking down in repentance and begging for forgiveness and absolution. However, this was not the case. Most of them stepped forward and confidently replied 'We were following the law; We were executing our orders'. This reply, while shocking, was named in legal parlance as 'Nuremberg Defence', implying a state (or any other) official washing off his hands to an act of injustice simply by quoting their obligation to follow the law of the land and executing their orders.

The above lack of any remorse on the part of the ex-Nazis can be written off as they being 'heartless' but it has profound implications. You see, when individuals tends to commit a wrong doing, they first have to deal with their own conscience (in case they have a one) and then their fear of law. However, when a state wants to do something morally questionable, they just need to do a simple thing; add a new line of law in the law book. This makes so many things clean on so many levels. You see, a State is not a person, so it doesn't have any conscience; that belongs to its human citizens. State is sovereign, so it has the right to make or change its laws. The law is above all and must be implemented. It has to be enforced by the state's enforcers. In case the enforcer, being a human, face any moral dilemma, he/she can always counter it with their own perception of doing their rightful duty. This takes the moral conscience out of the picture. The second control, that is the fear of law was never a problem to the state as the law which can punish the state itself can be altered by state. So both the legal and moral brakes are gone. The stage is set for the perfect crime; one which on one hand makes the victim suffer and on the other lets go the perpetrator unscathed. neither legally nor morally. One can now easily wipe out 6 million Jews, can declare a nuclear war on a hapless country, or even execute the most erratic and senseless legislation seen in recent times. No problem. "We were following the law, we were executing our duty. Hail the state"

Fast forward seventy years from world war 2, to the city of Bangalore in state of Karnataka in the republic of India. Depending upon whom you ask, the order may be switched between the 'Republic of India' and 'State of Karnataka'; these days either one of them can come first. The city, thanks to its good stars in heaven, saw some phenomenal growth in last two decades and roped in people from all across the country to chase their 'Indian dream'; if there is anything like that. With all these people came their baggage; some of it was on two wheels, remaining on four (two wheelers and four wheelers). Constitution of their country granted them the right to freely travel in the country and settle wherever they please, barring a few restricted areas (alas, Bangalore wasn't one of them). However, this fundamental right applies only to human beings. Their vehicles are governed by the Indian Motor Vehicle Act (MVA) and the tax related part by respective State's taxation act. Now refer back to second para where it is said that state is sovereign and can do whatever they feel like doing. So in February 2014, the state of Karnataka figured out that all the vehicles registered outside the state who have been loitering around in Karnataka for more than 30 days must register immediately with the state RTO. The first part was in line with some 'security concerns' that someone figured out somehow at some point of time. The second part was really a killer; for registering, pay the entire road tax for the life of the vehicle. To those unaware to what this meant, you are required to pay a sum up to few lakhs on cars and bikes which have seen the best days of their automotive lives. Perhaps if they are sold in used car market, they wont even fetch a value enough to pay for their road tax. Nevertheless, this was the new line in the law book, and the state enforcer started enforcing it. Please remember, they had to follow their orders, they had to hold law supreme.

What happened as a result of implementing this new law was a first hand experience in day light car-jacking for thousands of hapless motorist in the city; there only mistake was their vehicle's out of state registration. I say that it was their only mistake because they have rightfully paid the entire due road tax to the state from where they are coming. In good faith, it is to be assumed that their original state has used their money to make or maintain roads in their area, which coincidentally also happens to be Republic of India as well. So all of these tax payers felt hunky dory that their dues are all paid towards their country. Alas, their understanding fell flat once they entered the great state of Karnataka, which is perhaps currently in the process of self contemplation of whether it comes before or after republic of India. Until it reaches any conclusion on this matter, all of these automotive intruders and their owners are to be treated as criminals; guilty unless proven innocent (good luck with that!). Of course, for making a public announcement, there were three things on top of state's agenda : Security threat, Tax evasion and 'We are following the law'. Let us decipher their code one by one.

On 26/11/2008, when Ajmal Kasaab was arrested in Mumbai, nobody bothered to check the registration of the car that he was in while he was arrested. The car most likely belonged to some hapless citizen who was forced to surrender it at gun point. Now imagine the same scenario repeating in Bangalore; you driving somewhere in the city and a Lashkar-e-Taiyaba terrorist pointing his rifle at you. At this point, if you have a KA registration number plate, no problem; the terrorist will cause you no harm and will bow before you as you car passes him. However, if it was an out of state vehicle, he will car-jack it and after that only god knows what he will do with it. Do you think I am making any sense? Indeed not, but in my defence, the state started it first. The only plausible 'security concern' that state might present is that an out of state vehicle is hard to track in case of an accident within the state. Point taken Sir, our RTO registration data base is not centralised. So, what is the countermeasure for that? Simple, ask every out of state vehicle hanging around somewhere in Karnataka to show up at their nearest RTO office with all of their residential address proof while they are in Karnataka and obtain a 'Green Card' which assures that the physical location of the vehicle is known. Send RTO or other external agency personnel to verify this address as well (if in doubt, ask how a humble mobile phone service provider manages this) By the way, did the state just said their is no provision in law for this? Hmm, read para 2 again; state is sovereign, they can make any rule they please. They made the Road tax amendment earlier, they can make this change as well. What is stopping them?

Point two, Tax evasion. I didn't mention this ago but the state of Karnataka have some really generous neighbours. In many of them, road tax rates are way cheaper than in Karnataka. Also, some of them, despite charging less road tax, somehow manage to have a better road infrastructure than Karnataka. Ignoring this slightly embarrassing point, owing to low tax structure, some greedy fellows, while living in Karnataka, registered there vehicles in these cheaper road tax states. OK. So what are you supposed to do then? Number one: complain to your neighbours and tell them not to be a mute witness and an accessory in this tax theft. Did Karnataka did this; god knows. Next, if the neighbours don't lend you an ear, go complaint to the Union Ministry of Transport to put pressure on your neighbours. Did Karnataka did this; again god only knows. After that, strike at the heart of the problem; try to negotiate with your neighbours to have a common tax rate. I sincerely doubt whether Karnataka state even thought of doing this, so no question asked. In short, you allowed tax heavens to creep up near your state borders and then you unleash the whip on those 'Revenue thieves'. All right Sir, they are the thieves but who gave them the motive, huh?

And lastly, the good old 'We followed the law' argument. As the Americans pointed out at Nuremberg, even following a wrong order or a wrong law is actually wrong, although I will not impose this on the state enforcers. In para 2 itself I have highlighted how easy it is to make a wrong into right simply by changing the law on part of the state. State can change the law because it is their right. However, you see Sir, just because you have a right, it doesn't mean that you are right. A law was made that asks citizen to pay tax for a service (i.e. road) for which he has already paid the tax. Is that right from citizens view point? Why is he supposed to be taxed again? Even if the state has the right to ask the citizen to pay the tax again, I stand firm on my ground that it is not right. State's 'right' to make a law that eventually does 'wrong' to a citizen is beyond my comprehension.

The ongoing situation in Bangalore has really torn apart a city which is known for its cosmopolitan culture and the mix of people from all parts of country. While I joked about the presence of any thing like an Indian dream, for so many people, coming, working and settling in Bangalore is actually a life time dream; at least it was mine. However, this recent situation has really posted considerable hurdles in meeting this achievement. I pray to god (and also to Supreme court and Union Ministry of transport) that better sense prevails soon and the issue meets a peaceful end.

PS: Just in order to save myself from being sued, let me clarify that I am not comparing the state or any of its enforcers with Nazis or anyone else from Second world war. The opening paras are only to explain the meaning of Nuremberg defence. The intention of this blog is to merely point out the weakness in state's defence on the controversy of out of state vehicles in Bangalore.

[sunilnp]

Hi Waseem
Please share the extract of court order vacating the stay? on what grounds did the court pass the orders?
Cheers
Sunil

[monster2]

Urgent help required,

Has Anyone paid Road Tax in Bangalore for Honda Civic VMT 2009 Model the Road tax paid in Mumbai was 193000, NOC taken for Karnataka in June 2014, any penalty should be paid? Can I any one please tell me the Road Tax amount