Order on ceasing bike taxi operations to come into effect from June 16
A Division Bench of the High Court, on June 13, upheld a single judge order dated April 2, which had directed all bike taxi services to wind up operations within six weeks. Although an extension was granted until June 15, the deadline now marks the end of bike taxi rides in the State unless a regulatory framework is introduced.
A senior official from the Karnataka Transport Department confirmed that the department is preparing to implement the court's order and will not permit the continuation of bike taxi services beyond the stipulated deadline. However, regarding the regulatory framework the officer did not wish to comment.
The move is expected to affect thousands of riders and commuters. An executive from a leading bike taxi aggregator platform, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that over six lakh individuals in Karnataka depend on bike taxi gigs for their livelihood. 'Most of them earn around ₹35,000 a month, and this ban could push many families into financial distress,' the official noted.
Impact of ban
The impact of the ban is twofold: while it disrupts the lives of gig workers, it also leaves commuters stranded. For several residents, especially those dependent on public transport, bike taxis provided a cheaper last-mile solution. Commuters said that the services were not only cheaper but also faster, helping daily office-goers and students navigate city traffic with ease.
A Whitfield resident and daily commuter, Rohan Imdapura, said, 'Bike taxis were a lifesaver for people like me. Getting from home to the metro station used to cost barely ₹30–₹40. Now I will be forced to rely on autorickshaws, which are expensive and not always dependable.'
The court's decision, however, has been welcomed by autorickshaw drivers, who have been at loggerheads with bike taxi operators over what they describe as unfair competition. Rudramurthy, general secretary of the Autorickshaw Drivers' Union, said, 'This verdict is a huge relief. Bike taxis were running without clear regulations, which affected our earnings and posed safety risks to commuters. The government must now ensure there are no illegal operations continuing under the radar.'
Over the past few years, tensions have flared between auto drivers and bike taxi riders, occasionally erupting into confrontations on the streets.
Uncertain future
Meanwhile, representatives of bike taxi riders said the decision has left thousands in limbo. Adi Narayana, president of the Bike Taxi Welfare Association, said many riders are approaching the association's offices seeking clarity on their future. 'Most of our captains have EMIs to pay, families to feed, and rent to cover. This is not just about losing a job, it's about losing the ability to survive. Will the government offer any support?' he asked.
Rapido, one of the leading platforms operating bike taxis in the State, has responded to the High Court's ruling by confirming that it will comply with the directive effective June 16. While the company clarified that it is not a party to the current legal case, it acknowledged the situation and said it remains committed to acting as a responsible participant in the State's transport ecosystem.
'This is a difficult time for our captains, who depend on us for their main source of income. They have played a key role in enabling affordable, last-mile transportation for millions across Karnataka,' a Rapido spokesperson said.
The company stated it is actively engaging with the Karnataka Transport Department to develop a regulatory framework that is not only lawful but also viable for all stakeholders involved. It stressed that the safety of commuters and the well-being of gig workers will continue to be at the heart of its approach.
'We remain optimistic that ongoing discussions with the authorities will lead to a balanced policy framework, similar to those in other States and Union Territories,' the spokesperson added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
9 hours ago
- Economic Times
Debt by cash transactions of over Rs 20,000 not legally enforceable: Kerala HC
Synopsis The Kerala High Court made a significant ruling. It involves cash transactions exceeding Rs 20,000. Such debts are not legally enforceable without proper justification. This decision came during a cheque dishonor case appeal. The court acquitted the accused, emphasizing the need to discourage large cash transactions. This aligns with India's digital economy goals. The Kerala High Court on Friday declared that a debt created by a cash transaction of above Rs 20,000 in violation of the Income Tax Act is not a "legally enforceable debt" unless there is a valid explanation for the same. ADVERTISEMENT Justice P V Kunhikrishnan made the declaration while allowing a plea for setting aside the conviction and sentence of a man accused in a cheque dishonor case. The accused was sentenced to one year and imposed with a fine of Rs 9 lakh by a sessions court for the offence of dishonour of cheque due to insufficiency of funds in the account under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act. In his appeal in the High Court against the sessions court decision, the accused claimed that as the amount of Rs 9 lakh given to him by the complainant was in cash, it was an illegal transaction according to the Income Tax laws. "Therefore, a debt created by an illegal transaction cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt," the accused had claimed. Agreeing with the accused's contention, Justice Kunhikrishnan said that if a criminal court "indirectly legalises such illegal transactions in violation of the IT Act" by treating them as a legally enforceable debt, it will be against the aim of the country to discourage cash transactions above Rs 20,000. ADVERTISEMENT The High Court said that discouraging cash transactions above Rs 20,000 was also "a part of the 'digital India' dream of our country, which is propounded by our Prime Minister to save our economy and to curb a parallel economy in our country". "If the debt arises through an illegal transaction, that debt cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt. If the court regularises such transactions, that will encourage illegal transactions by the citizens. Even black money will be converted into white money through the criminal courts," the High Court said. ADVERTISEMENT It further said that in such cases the accused should challenge such transactions in evidence and has to rebut the presumption under section 139 of the NI Act that "the holder of a cheque received it for the discharge of a debt or other liability". In the instant case, the accused had rebutted the presumption by claiming that the complainant does not have the source to loan out Rs 9 lakh and therefore, the debt alleged to be due to him cannot be treated as a legally enforceable one, the HC said. ADVERTISEMENT It allowed the accused's revision petition and acquitted him by setting aside his conviction and sentence by the lower court. The High Court said if anybody pays an amount in excess of Rs 20,000 to another person by cash in violation of the IT Act and thereafter receives a cheque for that debt, he should take responsibility to get back the amount, unless there is a valid explanation for such cash transactions. ADVERTISEMENT "If there is no valid explanation in tune with provisions of the IT Act, the doors of the criminal court will be closed for such illegal transactions," the HC said. It also made it clear that its findings would be prospective in nature. (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online. NEXT STORY
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
Debt by cash transactions of over Rs 20,000 not legally enforceable: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court on Friday declared that a debt created by a cash transaction of above Rs 20,000 in violation of the Income Tax Act is not a " legally enforceable debt " unless there is a valid explanation for the same. Justice P V Kunhikrishnan made the declaration while allowing a plea for setting aside the conviction and sentence of a man accused in a cheque dishonor case . Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Others Management Technology CXO Data Analytics Product Management Digital Marketing Leadership Artificial Intelligence Data Science healthcare Public Policy Operations Management Cybersecurity MBA Degree MCA others Finance Data Science Project Management PGDM Skills you'll gain: Duration: 28 Weeks MICA CERT-MICA SBMPR Async India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 16 Weeks Indian School of Business CERT-ISB Transforming HR with Analytics & AI India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 9 months IIM Lucknow SEPO - IIML CHRO India Starts on undefined Get Details The accused was sentenced to one year and imposed with a fine of Rs 9 lakh by a sessions court for the offence of dishonour of cheque due to insufficiency of funds in the account under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Animal Advocate Begs: Never Do This With A Senior Dog ExpertsInPetHealth Learn More Undo In his appeal in the High Court against the sessions court decision, the accused claimed that as the amount of Rs 9 lakh given to him by the complainant was in cash, it was an illegal transaction according to the Income Tax laws. "Therefore, a debt created by an illegal transaction cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt," the accused had claimed. Live Events Agreeing with the accused's contention, Justice Kunhikrishnan said that if a criminal court "indirectly legalises such illegal transactions in violation of the IT Act" by treating them as a legally enforceable debt, it will be against the aim of the country to discourage cash transactions above Rs 20,000. The High Court said that discouraging cash transactions above Rs 20,000 was also "a part of the 'digital India' dream of our country, which is propounded by our Prime Minister to save our economy and to curb a parallel economy in our country". "If the debt arises through an illegal transaction, that debt cannot be treated as a legally enforceable debt. If the court regularises such transactions, that will encourage illegal transactions by the citizens. Even black money will be converted into white money through the criminal courts," the High Court said. It further said that in such cases the accused should challenge such transactions in evidence and has to rebut the presumption under section 139 of the NI Act that "the holder of a cheque received it for the discharge of a debt or other liability". In the instant case, the accused had rebutted the presumption by claiming that the complainant does not have the source to loan out Rs 9 lakh and therefore, the debt alleged to be due to him cannot be treated as a legally enforceable one, the HC said. It allowed the accused's revision petition and acquitted him by setting aside his conviction and sentence by the lower court. The High Court said if anybody pays an amount in excess of Rs 20,000 to another person by cash in violation of the IT Act and thereafter receives a cheque for that debt, he should take responsibility to get back the amount, unless there is a valid explanation for such cash transactions. "If there is no valid explanation in tune with provisions of the IT Act, the doors of the criminal court will be closed for such illegal transactions," the HC said. It also made it clear that its findings would be prospective in nature.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Supreme Court dismisses Hyatt International Southwest Asia's appeal in tax case
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The particulars of the SC order: It is undisputed that the appellant's executives and employees paid frequent and regular visits to India to oversee operations and implement these so and so. The finding of the assessing officer, based on travelogues and job functions, established continuous and coordinated engagement, even though no single individual exceeded the nine month stay the threshold under article 521. The relevant consideration is continuity of business presence in aggregate, not the length of the stay of each individual employee. Once it is found that there is continuity in the business operations, the intermittent presence or return of a particular employee becomes immaterial and An insignificant in determining the existence of a permanent establishment. The High Court was correct in concluding that the appellant's role was not confined to high level decision making, but extended to substantial operational control and implementation. The appellant's ability to enforce compliance, oversee operations, and derive profit linked fee from the hotel's earnings, demonstrate a clear and continuous commercial nexus, and control with the hotel's core functions. This nexus satisfies the condition necessary for the constitution of a fixed place. Permanent establishment. In view of the foregoing analysis, we affirm the finding of the High Court that the appellant has a fixed place of permanent establishment in India within the meaning of article 51, and that the income received under the zone so attributable to such be and is therefore taxable in India. In a ruling that has significant implications for MNCs operating in India through permanent establishment (PE), the Supreme Court Thursday held that the income of Indian PE of UAE-headquartered Hyatt International Southwest Asia would be taxed as a distinct entity even if the global entity incurred court said there is no merit in Hyatt 's appeals. The company had argued that since it had suffered a loss at the entity level, no income should be attributable to the PE in India.A bench led by Justice JB Pardiwala dismissed the appeals filed by Hyatt against the Delhi High Court decision which held that the Indian PE of Hyatt International must be treated as a distinct entity for tax apex court said that on the basis of all the materials available on record, Hyatt is a permanent establishment, so tax procedures are applicable to it.
