Madras HC stays order levying Rs 1 lakh fine on Vijay in Rolls Royce case, asks actor to pay tax

The Madras High Court on Tuesday stayed the operation of the orders of a single judge levying a cost of Rs one lakh on popular actor Vijay over a luxury car import case and making certain adverse remarks against him. A division bench of Justices M Duraiswamy and R Hemalatha, which granted the interim stay, however, directed Vijay to remit the balance amount of 80 per cent of the entry tax levied on the import of his Rolls Royce Ghost Car from England in 2012. He should remit the amount within a week, on receipt of a fresh demand notice from the Commercial Tax department, the judges said. While dismissing a writ petition from Vijay seeking exemption from entry tax for his imported car on 13 July, Justice S M Subramaniam had indicted him for moving the court without paying it and imposed a cost of Rs one lakh on him to be remitted to the Chief Minister’s Welfare Fund. The judge had also observed that reel heroes should be real heroes in real life. After directing him to pay the tax, the judge had dismissed his petition. Aggrieved, Vijay filed the present appeal. When the matter came up today, Vijay’s senior counsel Vijay Narayan, former Tamil Nadu Advocate-General, told the bench led by Justice Duraiswamy that he was challenging the order of the single judge in so far as it imposed the cost of Rs one lakh and made some unwanted remarks. The tax liability is not under challenge, he said adding he wants the removal of the remarks and imposition of cost. Narayan said there was no necessity for the single judge to talk about the benefits of taxation for the country, the ill effects of not paying the same. The comment that “reel heroes must be real heroes in their lives” was totally unwanted. There were umpteen number of similar cases and they were either allowed or dismissed by simple and plain orders. The remarks against Vijay were uncharitable, he contended. In this connection, he cited a ruling of the Supreme Court which had held that judges were to avoid unwarranted remarks and refrain from doing so. Directing the Transport department to file its counter, the bench adjourned the matter till August 31.