Judgment :- 1. The Writ Petition is filed for a direction to the respondent i.e., the Registering Authority, Chennai Central), Chennai 31, to register the imported Vehicle Toyota Car Harier Wagon (5 Seater), bearing chassis No. MCU 15-0048264, Engine No. IMG-0692834, imported from Japan, under the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. The Petitioner submitted his application for registration of the above said vehicle. The application was returned by the respondent stating that there is no certification for payment of sales tax. Therefore, the petition was returned with a direction to the owner of the vehicle to resubmit the petition with proof of payment of sales tax- 3. The Vehicle was imported from Japan by TVS Electronic Ltd. Necessary income-tax has been paid. The petitioner has been permitted to import the Vehicle, for which, he has paid the duties as claimed, totally a sum of Rs. 16,27,217/-. The petitioner therefore, submitted the vehicle for Registration. According to the petitioner, the authority has no right to return the application for registration and that he is bound to register the same. 4. Learning counsel for the petitioner submitted that a special duty of 4% was charged in lieu of skies tax amounting to Rs. 1,18,812/- and the car imported was cleared through the Bombay Port after payment of all charges and duties and has been brought to Chennai with temporary certificate of registration granted by the Regional Transport Officer, Mumbai. The vehicle has been brought for the use of the petitioners company. The respondent, who is the authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, has no power to insist that the petitioner shall produce the proof of payment of Sales tax. He is not the authority to levy the Sales tax or assess the Sales tax. Moreover, according to petitioner, the vehicle is an imported one and there is no liability to pay the entry tax. The liability to pay the entry tax would arise only when the vehicle is imported from any other State in India and not when it is imported from abroad. 5. Moreover, according to petitioner, the vehicle is an imported one and there is no liability to pay the entry tax. The liability to pay the entry tax would arise only when the vehicle is imported from any other State in India and not when it is imported from abroad. 5. In this connection, he relies upon the decision reported in 1999 Sales Tax Cases 591 (FR-William Fernandez v. State of Kerala) wherein a Bench of the Kerala High Court has held that entry of goods from any place outside the State did not mean to convey outside the country from abroad since the distinction between them is so obvious as not to have escaped notice. Further, the Kerala High Court has held that entry of vehicles brought from abroad is outside the scope of the Act and therefore, vehicles brought from abroad are not liable to entry tax under the Act. 6. Previously, there was no uniform rate of Sales tax prevailing in the country. Some of the States levied less tax, while some States levied higher rate of tax. Therefore, with a view to curb the practice of bringing the vehicles in Tamil Nadu purchased in other states, where the Sales tax is less, the Tamil Nadu Entry tax Act was passed in the year 1990. 7. Learned Special Government Pleader Mr. Thirugnanasambandam only submitted that even if a nil-return is submitted, the same will be accepted and the authority concerned will register the Vehicle. Further, he submitted that the Sales tax Department has not been made a party to this writ petition. When it is neither necessary nor incumbent upon the petitioner to file a return, it is not open to the respondent to insist upon the petitioner to submit a return. Just to please the respondent, the petitioner cannot be compelled to submit any return as required or demanded by the respondent. The respondent is the Registering Authority under the Motor Vehicles Act. He cannot take on the role of an Assessment Officer under the Income Tax or Sales Tax Act or insist upon proof of payment of Sales tax. The Sales Tax Officer or his Department has nothing to do with the Registration of vehicle and therefore, they are not necessary parties to the petition. 8. He cannot take on the role of an Assessment Officer under the Income Tax or Sales Tax Act or insist upon proof of payment of Sales tax. The Sales Tax Officer or his Department has nothing to do with the Registration of vehicle and therefore, they are not necessary parties to the petition. 8. Further, it is not a case, where the necessity to pay entry tax would arise, since it is an imported vehicle for which necessary duties have been levied and collected by the authorities. The petitioner has produced along with his application all the documents such as bill of lading, income tax certificate, payment of duty and certificate of clearance. The act of the respondent in returning the application for registration is wrong and illegal. The authority had no right to insist upon the proof of payment of Sales tax as a condition precedent for registration of the Motor Vehicles. Hence, accepting the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner I hold that return of the application by the authorities concerned is arbitrary, highhanded, illegal and beyond the powers of the authority. 9. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, issuing a direction to the respondent to register the imported vehicle viz. TOYOTA CAR-Harrier wagon (5 seater), bearing Chassis No. MCU-15-0048264, Engine No. IMZ-0692834 imported by the petitioner for his use, within two weeks of production of a copy of this order along with the with necessary affidavit. In the circumstances of the case, there is no order as to cost. Consequently, WMP. No. 123 54/99 will stand dismissed.