Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Lalitha Healthcare Pvt Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Luxury Tax)-1, Bangalore – Respondent
ORDER :
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
In these petitions, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:
"In W.P.No.9505/2021:
(i) quashing the impugned reassessment order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the 1st Respondent for RC No.581409256 under Sections 7-A(1), 5-A(2-A) and 7-A(2) of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979 (Annexure-'A');
(ii) quashing the impugned demand notice in Form VI dated 31.03.2021 bearing T. No.129 for RC No.581409256 issued by the 1st Respondent under the provisions of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979 (Annexure 'B');
(iii) quashing the impugned Clarification dated 02.07.2015 bearing No.KTL/CR-08/2013-14 issued by the 2nd Respondent under the provisions of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979 (Annexure 'C');
(iv) declaring that Sections 3-E(1) and 2(1-C) of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979, are ultra vires Article 246(3) read with Entry 62 of List II in Schedule VII to the Constitution of India, 1950, if the said provisions are construed so as to provide for the levy of tax under the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979, on the charges for facilities provided to patients admitted in Intensive Care Units;
(v) declaring that the levy of tax under the p
The amendment exempting luxury tax on ICU charges is retrospective, reinforcing the principle that clarificatory statutes apply to prior assessments.
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 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.
An establishment classified primarily as a hotel providing luxury and leisure services is liable for luxury tax, not merely based on Ayurvedic treatment provisions.
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 amendments to Section 17(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are constitutional, addressing legislative gaps without infringing on judicial authority or violating Article 14 of the Constitution.
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
