THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
Brunton Boatyard, represented by its Executive Officer, Michael Dominic – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, represented by The Secretary – Respondent
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
1. These writ appeals arise from a common judgment rendered holding that charges collected for ayurvedic treatment, for laundry services and charges collected from customers for boating arrangements by the hotel where they are accommodated, attract luxury tax. The appellants contend and it is argued by the learned senior counsel appearing for them that the laundry charges, charges received for boating and ayurvedic treatment charges do not come within the purview of 'luxury provided in a hotel' as defined in Section 2(f) of the Kerala Tax on Luxuries Act, 1976. According to the appellants, that term takes in only accommodation for residence and other amenities and other services provided in a hotel and the aforesaid charges are not received for any luxury provided in the hotel. It is pointed out that the term is defined to mean what it says and therefore, it cannot be extended beyond. It is further argued that the definition of the term 'luxury' in Section 2(ee) does not take within its sweep such services which do not minister comfort or pleasure. The appellants would point out that the amenities specified under Section 4(2) are only amen
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.