SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2282

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
Lalitha Healthcare Pvt Ltd. - Appellant
Vs.
Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Luxury Tax)-1, Bangalore - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 9505 of 2021 (T-RES) C/W Writ Petition No. 9378 of 2021 (T-RES) Writ Petition No. 9491 of 2021 (T-RES) Writ Petition No. 9507 of 2021 (T-RES) Writ Petition No. 6804 of 2022 (T-IT) Writ Petition No. 8149 of 2022 (T-RES)
Decided On : 26-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri. Sandeep Huilgol, Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri. K.Hema Kumar, AGA

The amendment exempting luxury tax on ICU charges is retrospective, reinforcing the principle that clarificatory statutes apply to prior assessments.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Tax on Luxuries Act, 1979 - Sections 3-E(1), 2(1-C), and 5-A(2-A) - Writ petitions challenging luxury tax levied on ICU charges - Court examined the retrospective applicability of the amendment exempting ICU charges from luxury tax - State's argument regarding the prospective nature of the amendment was rejected. (Paras 6-12)

(B) Constitutional Law - Articles 14 and 21 - The levy of luxury tax on ICU charges was held ultra vires these articles of the Constitution. (Paras 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners sought to quash reassessment orders and demand notices issued for luxury tax on ICU charges collected from patients, claiming such charges were exempted under the amended provisions of the Karnataka Tax on Luxuries Act, 1979.

Findings of Court:
Court ruled that the amendment to exempt ICU charges is retrospective, as it merely clarifies existing provisions.

Issues: Whether the amendment exempting ICU charges from luxury tax has retrospective effect.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a legislation clarifying an existing provision is generally retrospective unless expressly stated otherwise.

Result: Writ petitions allowed; impugned assessment orders and notices quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek to quash luxury tax reassessments. (Para 1 , 3)
2. arguments presented by the respondents against retrospective application. (Para 4 , 10)
3. analysis of the statutory provisions and their amendments. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. court's finding on the retrospective nature of the tax exemption. (Para 12)
5. final order quashing the assessment orders. (Para 13)

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 provisions of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979, on the charges for facilities provided to patients admitted in Intensive Care Units is ultra vires Arctiles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950; and

(vi) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice and equity.

In W.P.No.9378/2021:

(i) stay the operation of the impugned reassessment order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the 1st Respondent for RC 544413134 under Sections 9(1)(b), 5- A(2-A) and 7 of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979,read with Rule 6(3) of the Karnataka Tax on Luxuries Rules, 1979 (Annexure 'A');

(ii) stay the operation of the impugned demand notice in Form VI dated 31.03.2021 for Regn. Certificate No.544413134 issued by the 1st Respondent under the provisions of the KARNATAKA TAX ON LUXURIES ACT , 1979 (Annexure 'B');

(iii) stay the operation of 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) pass ad-interim ex-parte orders in terms of VI.(i) to VI.(iii) above; and

(v) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice and equity.

In W.P.No.9491/2021:

(i) quashing the impugned reassessment order dated 30.03.2021 passed by the 1st Respondent RC No.571410291 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 30.03.2021 bearing T. No.130 for RC No.571410291 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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top