Chennai: Observing that poor people buying half a litre and one litre petrol for their two-wheelers are not seeking exemptions, the Madras High Court on Thursday censured actor Dhanush for failing to pay entry tax for his Rolls Royce car, imported from the United Kingdom, since 2015 even after the issue was settled by the SC in 2018. Justice S M Subramaniam directed him to pay Rs 30.3 lakh tax due within 48 hours.

On July 13, the court had made certain observations against actor Vijay for challenging entry tax demand for a Rolls Royce Ghost. The observations were later stayed by a division bench. Suresh Kumar K reports.

“Crores of poor and middle-class people of this great nation are purchasing half a litre and one litre petrol for their low-end two-wheelers and they are not choosing to file cases seeking exemptions. While so, citizens enjoying a reputation for importing the most prestigious and luxury cars are expected to pay entry tax to the state, as they are going to be driven on the roads established by the state. Roads are laid from and out of the taxpayers' money,” said Justice S M Subramaniam.

On Thursday, counsel for Dhanush sought the court’s permission to withdraw the case. He said Dhanush had already paid 50% of the tax and that he was willing to pay the rest now.

Refusing to allow Dhanush to withdraw the plea, Justice Subramaniam said the petition had been pending since 2015.

“If your intentions are genuine, you should have paid the tax at least after the Supreme Court had settled the issue in 2018. But now, after the high court listed the matter for passing orders, you are seeking to withdraw,” the judge said.

Noting that Dhanush was right in arguing that claiming such exemption was his right, the court said, “However, while dealing with the rights of the citizen, constitutional courts are bound to remind the duties of the citizen under the Constitution.

When the duties are reminded upon to citizens, they cannot make a complaint that the court has exceeded its jurisdiction by unnecessarily penning down certain points.”

“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 court, whenever an occasion comes for the development and march of law,” Justice Subramaniam said.

“Wonderful ideas, ideologies, theories, doctrines in numerous judgments by way of ‘Obiter dicta’ (expression of opinion by judges) became the law of this great nation and contributed to the development of our democracy,” the court asserted.