Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Iprocess Clinical Marketing Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Taxes (Audit) Bengaluru – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks to quash tax orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner argues tax liability is erroneous. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court clarifies retrospective application of tax exemption. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 4. precedents support the retrospective nature of exempting notifications. (Para 9) |
| 5. court’s final order quashes earlier tax assessments. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
ORDER :
1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"i. Issue a Writ/Direction/Order in the nature of CERTIORARI, quashing/setting aside the impugned Order dated 25.02.2025 under Section 107(11) bearing GST AP No.287/2024-25 passed by the 2nd Respondent (Annexure A).
ii. Issue as Writ/Direction/Order in the nature of CERTIORARI, quashing/setting aside the impugned Adjudication Order dated 28.03.2024 bearing No. ACCT (Audit) 1.7/GST-ADJ-33/23-24 (Annexure B).
iii. Issue as Writ/Direction/Order in the nature of CERTIORARI, quashing/setting aside the impugned Summary of Order and Order under Section 73 both bearing reference no. ZD290324079816V dated28.03.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 1 (Annexure B1 and B2).
iv. Pass such other or further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstanc
Amendments clarifying tax exemptions for ICU services are retrospective, relieving hospitals from GST on such charges based on legislative intent.
Amendments clarifying tax applicability operate retrospectively, confirming that luxury tax on ICU charges is exempt based on legislative intent as clarified in the GST Council meeting.
The amendment exempting luxury tax on ICU charges is retrospective, reinforcing the principle that clarificatory statutes apply to prior assessments.
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules, which restricted refunds of IGST on exports where benefits of certain notifications were availed, was declared void for future cases following its omission by new legis....
The court affirmed that luxury tax applies to medical bed charges in hospitals, while penalties for non-declaration were set aside due to the petitioner's bona fide belief of non-liability.
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Act was declared unconstitutional, thus quashing all related proceedings, affirming rights to refund under the IGST Act without a saving clause.
![Sance Laboratories Private Limited VS Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Finance [Department of Revenue] - 2024 Supreme(Ker) 1148](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Kerala_1.png)
Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules was declared ultra vires Section 16 of the IGST Act for imposing unjust restrictions on exporters' right to claim IGST refunds.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
