Madras High Court Comes Down On Actor Dhanush For Seeking Entry Tax Exemption On Rolls Royce; Asks Him To Pay Over Rs 30 Lakhs Within 48 Hours

The Madras High Court on Thursday disposed of a 2015 writ petition filed by actor Dhanush pertaining to the payment of entry tax on a Rolls Royce Ghost car imported from the United Kingdom. The Court directed the actor to pay the remaining entry tax of Rs 30, 30, 757 within 48 hours.

The actor on Thursday sought the Court's leave to withdraw the 2015 writ petition and informed the Court that he was willing to pay the remaining tax due either on August 6 or on August 9. He also informed the Court that he had already paid 50 percent of the Entry Tax as per the interim order passed by the Court in 2015.

However, Justice SM Subramaniam did not accept the actor's request for withdrawal of the petition and directed the actor to pay the remaining entry tax within 48 hours.

The Court observed that there is a recurrent practice of 'rich affluent and reputed persons' importing vehicles from other countries and consequently refusing to pay the concerned Entry Tax despite 'plying the vehicles on the roads of Tamil Nadu'. Opining on the loss of revenue caused to the State owing to such a practice, the Court remarked,

"Undoubtedly, the State suffers huge revenue loss for many number of years, as these tax dues are not collected on account of the interim orders granted and due to pendency of the writ petitions"

It further observed that a large number of writ petitions on similar issues are currently pending before the High Court either due to the non-cooperation of the litigants or on account of the fact that despite interim orders being granted, such interim orders are being utilized for unjust gains.

"Cars imported several years back are plying on the roads within the State without paying Entry Tax. Ultimate revenue loss undoubtedly would affect the public interest", the order noted.

The Court then proceeded to make certain pertinent observations.

The actor has suppressed his identity in the petition which amounts to 'suppression of facts'

The Court referred to Article 226 of the Constitution of India which stipulates the manner in which the Affidavits are to be filed in a writ petition as well as the Madras High Court Writ Rules, 2021. It was noted that the concerned rules mandate the furnishing of personal information of the petitioner such as his name, professional details, residence etc.

Accordingly, the Court held that the actor in the instant petition had not mentioned his profession and other connected details but had simply stated that he had purchased a Rolls Royal Ghost car from London.

"The petitioner has suppressed his identity by not revealing his profession and therefore, it has to be construed that the writ petition is filed without furnishing the requisite details, amounts to suppression of facts", the Court opined. It further remarked that citizens must not forget their fundamental duties in order to avoid unnecessary ligations before the High Courts, which causes over burdening as well as a delay in addressing the grievance of genuine litigants.

Obiter Dictum is essential for the development of law

The Court further observed that High Courts and the Supreme Court are the custodian of the Constitution and are thus tasked with the duty to develop constitutional principles.

"Article 21 of the Constitution was developed from time to time and now providing a decent medical facility to the citizen becomes an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, it is duty casted upon the Constitutional Courts to contribute for the development of Constitutional philosophy and principles, so as to achieve the Constitutional visionary of the vibrant democracy", the Court opined.

The Court thus observed that the importance of obiter dicta in any judgment reminding the citizens of their duties or elaborating upon Constitutional principles can under no circumstances be undermined.

It further added,

"Constitutional Courts are not functioning to simply resolve the disputes by saying 1+1=2. Beyond resolving the issues between the parties, the extraordinary powers conferred under Article 226 is bound to be exercised by the High Courts, whenever an occasion comes for the development and March of law. Thus, such wonderful ideas, ideologies, theories, doctrines in numerous judgments by way of "Obiter dicta" became the law of this great Nation and contributed for the development of our Indian democracy"

Recent trend of claiming rights alone and forgetting fundamental duties

Justice Subramaniam admonished the mindset of citizens wherein only rights are claimed but fundamental duties are not carried out. Reliance was placed on Article 51A of the Constitution which states "to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement."

The Court further observed that the actor has raised the ground that claiming exemption from payment of tax is his right while forgetting his fundamental duty to protect the Constitutional values and in the interest of the public at large.

"When the duties are reminded upon to citizen, they cannot make a complaint that Court has exceeded its jurisdiction by unnecessarily penning down certain points. There exactly the principles of "Obiter dicta" come into assistance", the Court remarked.

'Owners of luxurious cars' must fulfil constitutional duty of paying tax

The Court opined that currently thousands of poor and middle class people of this country are purchasing half litre and one litre petrol for their low end two wheelers and are not seeking the Court's leave for exemption of taxes imposed.

"Citizen enjoying reputation in the society on importing most prestigious and luxury car of the world from England is expected to pay the Entry tax to the State Government as they are plying the imported luxury car from abroad on the road within the State of Tamil Nadu. The roads across the State are laid from and out of the tax payers' money. Thus, reminding the fundamental duty of the citizen is the Constitutional duty of the High Court", the Court remarked.

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition with the following directions,

i. Relief as sought for in this writ petition stands rejected.

ii. The petitioner is directed to pay the balance arrears of Entry Tax of Rs.30,30,757.00, as demanded by the respondents, within a period of 48 hours.

iii. The Registry, High Court Madras, is directed to ensure that affidavits filed by the litigants in writ petitions are entertained on compliance of the requirements as contemplated under The Madras High Court Writ Rules, 2021. In the event of any lapses, negligence or dereliction on the part of the officials, the Registrar General, High Court, Madras, is directed to initiate appropriate action under the Service Rules in force. 

Recently, Justice Subramaniam had made scathing remarks against actor Vijay in a similar case, and imposed a cost of Rupees one lakh on him for challenging levy of entry tax. Vijay approached the division bench against the order, aggrieved with the adverse remarks and the cost, while agreeing to pay the tax. The division bench stayed the single bench order on the basis of undertaking of Vijay to pay the balance tax.

Case Title: K Dhanush v. State of Tamil Nadu

Click Here To Read/Download Order