CHANDRAKANTARAJ, J, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER IS AGGRIEVED BY LEVY OF motor VEHICLE's TAX ON HIS VEHICLE registered IN THE STATE OF TAMILNADU, bearing REGISTRATION NO. TAD 9797. IT IS HIS CASE THAT HE WAS CARRYING passengers FROM DHARMAPURI TO PLACES in THE STATES OF MAHARASHTRA, GOA AND karnataka IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE permit ISSUED BY THE AUTHORITIES IN tamilnadu AND THEREFORE, HE IS NOT liable TO PAY ANY TAX CLAIMED. HAVING paid THE TAX UNDER PROTEST ALONG WITH spot FINE OF 1. 000/-, HE HAS PRAYED FOR a DIRECTION TO RESPONDENT TO REFUND OF the MONEY. ( 2 ) THE MANDAMUS FOR SUCH REFUNDCOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED IF THE PETITIONER makes OUT A CASE. IN THE STATEMENT of OBJECTION FILED AND RECORDS IN support THEREOF, IT IS SEEN THAT THOUGH the PERMIT WAS ISSUED BY THE TAMILNADU authorities, THE PASSENGERS, ON their OWN STATEMENT, HAD BOARDED THE bus AT K. G F. AND ALL ARE WORKERS OF b E. M L. WHO HAD UNDERTAKEN A TOUR IN the STATES OF MAHARASHTRA, GOA AND karnataka. THE PHOTOSTAT STATEMENT issued BY ONE OF THE PASSENGERS IS found IN THE RECORDS. THEREFORE, THE claim OF THE PETITIONER IS PATENTLY NOT tenable. HE HAS USED THE VEHICLE IN karnataka STATE. THE EARLIER EXEMPTION available TO THE VEHICLES OF OTHER states COVERED BY SPECIAL PERMITS HAS since BEEN WITHDRAWN AND THEREFORE, if THE VEHICLE REGISTERED IN ANOTHER state IS USED IN THIS STATE, OWNER IS liable TO PAY TAX. ( 3 ) THEREFORE, LEVY ITSELF IS NOTINCORRECT. BUT, HOWEVER, THE AUTHORITIES have LEVIED TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH schedule-B FOR A PERIOD OF SEVEN DAYS, having REGARD TO THE FACT THAT THE vehicle CEASED TO OPERATE FROM THE lime OF ITS SEIZURE FOR NON-PAYMENT OF tax. THEREFORE, THERE IS NOTHING inconsistent WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE taxing STATUTE. PETITIONER HAS NOT made OUT A CASE FOR INTERFERENCE. THEREFORE, PETITION IS REJECTED. ( 4 ) PETITIONER TO PAY COSTS TO THESTATE. ADVOCATE's FEE RS. 100/ -. WRIT PETITION REJECTED WITH COSTS. --- *** --- .