Vehicles Used Only Inside Factory Premises Not ‘Motor Vehicles’: Madras High Court Quashes Entry Tax on Tippers, Mobile Cranes

HomeIndirect TaxesVehicles Used Only Inside Factory Premises Not ‘Motor Vehicles’: Madras High Court...

Vehicles Used Only Inside Factory Premises Not ‘Motor Vehicles’: Madras High Court Quashes Entry Tax on Tippers, Mobile Cranes

Indirect Taxes

Published on

26/01/2026

By Mariya Paliwala

Vehicles Used Only Inside Factory Premises Not ‘Motor Vehicles’: Madras High Court Quashes Entry Tax on Tippers, Mobile Cranes

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has held that AMW Tippers (Dumpers) and Hydraulic Mobile Cranes used exclusively within factory or enclosed premises cannot be treated as “motor vehicles” for the purpose of levying entry tax under the Tamil Nadu Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles to Local Areas Act, 1990. The bench…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Mariya Paliwala https://www.jurishour.in/

Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Tags
Motor Vehicles

Vehicles Used Only Inside Factory Premises Not ‘Motor Vehicles’: Madras High Court Quashes Entry Tax on Tippers, Mobile Cranes

Membership Required

Latest articles

CESTAT Upholds Customs Classification of Mitsubishi’s Electric Power Steering ECU as Automobile Part

Job Work Can’t Be Treated as ‘Exempted Service’; No 7% CENVAT Reversal on Job Charges: CESTAT

Captive Power Transfer Must Be Valued at Consumer Tariff, Not Electricity Board Purchase Rate: Chhattisgarh High Court

Calcutta High Court Orders Restoration of GST Registration Despite Six-Month Return Default, Cites Livelihood Concerns

More like this

CESTAT Upholds Customs Classification of Mitsubishi’s Electric Power Steering ECU as Automobile Part

Job Work Can’t Be Treated as ‘Exempted Service’; No 7% CENVAT Reversal on Job Charges: CESTAT

Captive Power Transfer Must Be Valued at Consumer Tariff, Not Electricity Board Purchase Rate: Chhattisgarh High Court

About us

Company

Categories